[#27003] [Bug #2422] splat operator fails on array of 1 element — Raul Parolari <redmine@...>

Bug #2422: splat operator fails on array of 1 element

12 messages 2009/12/02

[#27025] [Backport #2431] StringIO#{gets,readlines} with "" (paragraph mode) trims last "\n" — Hiroshi NAKAMURA <redmine@...>

Backport #2431: StringIO#{gets,readlines} with "" (paragraph mode) trims last "\n"

8 messages 2009/12/04

[#27086] [Feature #2454] OpenSSL has no maintainer — Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>

Feature #2454: OpenSSL has no maintainer

16 messages 2009/12/07

[#27120] #to_enum ignores block? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>

Is #to_enum ignoring its block expected?

11 messages 2009/12/09

[#27135] better GC? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>

Could I put in a small plea for a better GC?

56 messages 2009/12/10
[#27136] Re: better GC? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2009/12/11

Hi,

[#27476] Re: better GC? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2010/01/07

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 09:07:16AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#27477] Re: better GC? — Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...> 2010/01/07

Excerpts from Paul Brannan's message of Thu Jan 07 21:53:34 +0200 2010:

[#27563] Re: better GC? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2010/01/12

[#27199] [Backport #2488] thread usage can result in bad HANDLE — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Backport #2488: thread usage can result in bad HANDLE

12 messages 2009/12/16

[#27286] [Bug #2515] Array#select! — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Bug #2515: Array#select!

17 messages 2009/12/22

[#27327] [Bug #2531] Ruby 1.8.7-p248 fails to cross-compile same version — Luis Lavena <redmine@...>

Bug #2531: Ruby 1.8.7-p248 fails to cross-compile same version

9 messages 2009/12/25

[#27360] [Feature #2542] URI lib should be updated to RFC 39886 — Marc-Andre Lafortune <redmine@...>

Feature #2542: URI lib should be updated to RFC 39886

15 messages 2009/12/31

[ruby-core:27150] Re: Ruby's GC

From: Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...>
Date: 2009-12-12 03:40:20 UTC
List: ruby-core #27150
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Brian Mitchell <binary42@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> 2009/12/11 Gon=E7alo Silva <goncalossilva@gmail.com>:
>> Then because of C extensions support the generational GC is not an optio=
n.
>> What would then be the best algorithm for a GC for Ruby? Mark and don't
>> sweep? A non-halting algorithm would be great.
>
> Generational collection can be done without coping/moving objects
> around. Apple's Objective-C runtime has to deal with the same issues
> for GC work and it seems like they've managed to get it working using
> marking bits to denote generation and adapt to this during the marking
> phases. Not ideal but it can work. I've wondered what it would take to
> port the autozone library [0] over to Ruby 1.9...
>
> Brian.
>
> [0]: http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/autozone/
>
>

Interesting.

But there are advantages to copying collectors, in that they tend to
compact the active objects, and therefore keep working set sizes
smaller, which generally leads to better performance in virtual memory
systems.

Working set size is also the reason why, in many circumstances,
byte-code with or without JIT expansion, can outperform direct
compilation to machine code.

--=20
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

In This Thread

Prev Next