Re: Garbage Collection in C
- From: Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:43:50 +0200
SM Ryan <wyrmwif@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
"Paul Connolly" <pgconnolly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
#
# "SM Ryan" <wyrmwif@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
# message news:12j8dmrsobs4r27@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
#
# > Garbage collection + finalisation allows you everything destructors
# > do with fewer restrictions in the language and less work by
# > programmers.
#
# everything? so this garbage collection doesn't use any more memory than hand
Then don't use it.
This involves a technical point of language design. Destructors
were added to C++ because it had no garbage collection. The
result is far more complicated language implementation which
can still has implicit storage management activated.
Destructors do more than releasing memory. And finalisation is not a
good substitute for these tasks as finalisation is not synchronous.
Yours,
--
Jean-Marc
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Garbage Collection in C
- From: SM Ryan
- Re: Garbage Collection in C
- References:
- Re: Garbage Collection in C
- From: Paul Connolly
- Re: Garbage Collection in C
- From: SM Ryan
- Re: Garbage Collection in C
- Prev by Date: Re: Garbage Collection in C
- Next by Date: Re: How to remove // comments
- Previous by thread: Re: Garbage Collection in C
- Next by thread: Re: Garbage Collection in C
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|