Daniel C. Wang
Fri, 01 Oct 2004 18:01:03 -0400
Stephen Weeks wrote:
> As to pause times, my argument about space safety comes into play
> again. If one wants space safety then one must have a GC, which
> brings problems about pause times back.
Not that I disagree with anything that you said, but I wanted to point out
that the definition of "space safety" is heavily biased by the GC's notion
of "live" data. The whole notion of space safety is basically a
specification for when a GC ought to collect data. All automatic storage
management systems are conservative in some way. I think it's fair to say
that regions are often conservative in a more annoying ways than a space
safe GC. However, I could imagine a system which is not strictly safe for
space but at the same time useful from a practical standpoint.
Space safety is just one of many arbitrary properties for storage recycling.
> The only place where regions
> offer an improvement is on programs specially written for regions
> where the data has a stack-like behavior, the analysis can prove it,
> and the programmer can be convinced that there are no space leaks.
> Maybe the Cyclone stuff does this -- I haven't read it.