[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lazy sweeping.
From: |
Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: |
Re: lazy sweeping. |
Date: |
Mon, 29 Jul 2002 15:06:01 +0200 |
address@hidden writes:
> >> ditto for malloced memory, I guess.
> >
> > Hrm. I'll have to add some more logic then -- we want to be able to
> > completely clean the heap, but not advance the "free mem starts here"
> > pointer. What would be the right behavior: doing a full sweep, or a
> > mark + full sweep? Or maybe just both (first the full sweep, if it
> > doesn't yield enough: the full mark.)
>
> that's what I've meant, yes. however, it's just as optimization, and
> the occurences where it might theoretically matter (system heap
> exhaustion or running out of file descriptors) could probably be
> considered to be rare enough.
>
> as long as you take care to finish the last sweep before marking, you
> should be fine, correctness-wise.
at first I didn't, and it barfed all over the place. That is neat
about working with the GC itself. Any error will blow up grotesquely:
that makes debugging a lot easier.
by-the-by: anyone for a quick hint how to setup a C catch handler from C?
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | address@hidden | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/
Re: lazy sweeping., Han-Wen, 2002/07/30
Re: lazy sweeping., Tom Lord, 2002/07/29
Re: lazy sweeping., Mikael Djurfeldt, 2002/07/29