From: Garthy D <garthy_lmkltybr@...>
Date: 2013-01-26T18:12:18+09:00
Subject: Re: Soft object reference for mark and sweep


Hi Nokan,

Thankyou for the input, and no, it's not silly. :) It's opened up the 
possibility of another approach- don't use the Hash at all, and merely 
dig through ObjectSpace when needed, possibly even externally to the 
script in some way. Combined with a cache it might form an interesting 
first-pass solution. In any case, it raises the question as to whether 
looking through things externally (ie. via ObjectSpace) could offer a 
potential solution. I'm not 100% sure how it'd all fit together, but 
it's definitely got me thinking. :)

Cheers,
Garth

PS. I'm also relieved that my original post was understandable- it's a 
problem that's a little hard to explain.

On 26/01/13 19:22, Nokan Emiro wrote:
>     Any ideas as to a good way or suitable mechanisms to implement this?
>
>
> Just a silly one:  if you seldom use that Hash in the store, you can
> eliminate it.  You could
> still lookup your objects by iterating trough ObjectSpace and find them.
>   But this way the
> GC will be able to drop objects if there's no reference to them.
>   Basically what you do here
> the same old stuff:  a trade off between memory and CPU.  You have to
> decide if lookup
> speed is more important than memory footprint or the other way around.
>   (...or wait for a
> less silly answer here... :)
>