On 11/19/2012 08:24 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
On 11/16/12, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote:
On Nov 16, 2012 Basile Starynkevitch <bas...@starynkevitch.net> wrote:
I actually disagree with the "Get rid of GC" idea, but I am not
sure that we all understand the same thing about it (and I have
the feeling of the opposite). I would probably agree with "Get
rid of Gengtype+Ggc+PCH and replace it with something better"
which might be what "Get rid of GC" mean.
We mean get rid of it. No garbage collection, whatsoever. We both
think that it is better to structure the compiler around memory pools.
However, we also concede that we are probably in the minority and we
will need to keep GC around.
I wouldn't jump to that conclusion too quickly. I think we should be
GC free as well, and I doubt I am the only other one.
Andrew
