|[11 earlier articles]|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? firstname.lastname@example.org (A.L.) (2006-09-28)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? email@example.com (2006-09-28)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? firstname.lastname@example.org (Greg Buchholz) (2006-09-28)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com (Robert A Duff) (2006-09-30)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? email@example.com (Daniel C. Wang) (2006-09-30)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? firstname.lastname@example.org (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2006-09-30)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? email@example.com (Wolfram Fenske) (2006-09-30)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? firstname.lastname@example.org (Satish Chandra Gupta) (2006-10-03)|
|Re: Compile Time Garbage Collection impossible? email@example.com (Oliver Bandel) (2006-10-08)|
|From:||"Wolfram Fenske" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||30 Sep 2006 17:44:12 -0400|
|References:||06-09-11906-09-136 06-09-143 06-09-153|
|Posted-Date:||30 Sep 2006 17:44:12 EDT|
email@example.com (Torben gidius Mogensen) schreibt:
> Florian Liekweg <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> Torben gidius Mogensen wrote:
>>> [...] the programmer may have to program with regions
>>> in mind, sometimes doing things somewhat differently than he would
>>> with RTGC.
>> Programming "with regions in mind" is very much like programming with
>> explicit, manual memory management in mind, except that you don't get
>> to deallocate single objects (which, come to think of it, isn't much
>> of a restriction).
>> Programming with "what will the compiler do with this program" in
>> mind would seem to be more of a torture, though.
> I think most programmers do exactly that.
If there's any truth to the statement that programs spend 90% of their
time in 10% of the code, they shouldn't. If you find your finished
program is too slow, you should use a profiler. There are exceptions
(interpreters, OSes, etc., when you know you need all the performance
you can get), but most programs just need to be fast enough.
> And you can argue that you need to have a good model of what the
> compiler does to understand what happens in, say, virtual method
Yes, but understanding language features and having to worry about the
compiler all the time are different things. Coming back to memory
management, the fact that Java is garbage-collected is probably one of
the main reasons why it has become so popular. After all, apart from
not having delete, Java is not *that* different from C++.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.