Re: ...more GC Stuff

Larry Rau <larryr@CyberGate.COM>
9 Feb 1996 17:03:20 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Possible to write compiler to Java VM? (I volunteer to summarize) (Peter Seibel) (1996-01-17)
Re: Ada GC (1996-02-02)
Re: Ada GC and a bunch of other stuff (1996-02-03)
Re: ...more GC Stuff larryr@CyberGate.COM (Larry Rau) (1996-02-09)
Re: ...more GC Stuff (hardware support) (1996-02-13)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Larry Rau <larryr@CyberGate.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 9 Feb 1996 17:03:20 -0500
Organization: not likely
References: 96-01-037 96-02-023 96-02-031
Keywords: GC, comment

All this recent talk of GC and Java Chips, etc has me curious about
some things which I hope the GC "experts" can offer their opinions.

If you have direct hardware support for GC what benefits can you see?
Beter performance? More reliability? bot? Besides just placing the
software in microcode or rom or whatever, can the hardware help GC.
Perhaps someting like the gc thread can tell the hardware to protect
this region of memory while I work. And thus all other threads can
continue as long as they don't hit that spot in memory? This was just
a "top of the head" comment, but our their issues like this?

[I reviewed a paper for Computing Reviews a couple of years ago about a
RAM chip design with GC support. It fell into the usual black hole: yes,
the stuff they did worked, but special purpose chips always lag far behind
commodity chips in performance, so you're overall better off using faster
dumber cheaper chips and working harder in software. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.