From: Matt Armstrong <matt+dated+1007407366.0f6d51@...>
Date: 2001-11-29T04:22:52+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:26827] Re: Ref Counting (was KDE or GNOME curiosity question...)

"Mark Hahn" <mchahn@facelink.com> writes:

> My thoughts on ref counting are really academic.  I am not arguing
> for anything.  I don't even know where these thoughts are leading.
> But...
>
> It seems to me that there are two distinctly seperate goals of
> garbage collection:
>
> 	1) Free up memory
> 	2) Finalize objects.
>
> Obviously goal 1 is better done with lazy processing.  That is the
> Java/Ruby GC approach.  Goal 2 is better done with ref counting.
>
> Most objects need goal 1 (not all, but most).  Only a few objects
> need goal 2.  Having goal 2 be met by an optional feature that costs
> more overhead, only on objects that need it, would be logical.

I'm not sure how optional ref counting can be accomplished without
overhead everywhere.  If object A needed ref counting and object B
didn't, ruby would somehow need to increment the reference count of A
and not of B when a new object gains a reference to A and B.  That
implies some run time check or indirection for both objects, true?


-- 
matt