2013/9/15 Raphael Mack <address@hidden>
True. But on the other hand, in safety related systems we have
RAM-testing in the background anyhow, so why not also collect some dead
objects during these cycles? - Don't get me wrong, I personally am not
yet convinced, that garbage collection is the best we could do.
When a GC is compiled in, it should at least check locals at function exit. Java and other garbage languages also start the GC at regular intervals in the background, but that means multi-threading.
When a GC is not compiled in, most core libraries try hard not to waste memory. There are a few exceptions: the latest libraries I wrote. I'll have to work on that too (later).
I don't know how wrapped libraries behave when there is a GC or not.
Also note, BDW GC support is still incomplete since the GC at program exit does not work as intended (all objects, including the root object, should be collected and disposed).
Cyril ADRIAN (from office)