• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?


  • Subject: Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
  • From: Jean-Denis MUYS <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:29:11 +0000
  • Thread-topic: Why ARC over garbage collection?


On 16 oct. 2012, at 02:24, Jens Alfke <email@hidden>
 wrote:

As I said before, it’s much harder (perhaps impossible) to implement really efficient GC for native apps. It works a lot better in ‘managed’ environments like Java/C#/Smalltalk/LISP/etc.

Lisp in this list is *not* a language that usually runs in a managed environment. Macintosh Common Lisp had full ephemeral GC back in the 1990's and it generated native 68k code (under Mac OS 7 back then IIRC). So does its offspring Closure.

So it *is* possible to have efficient, non-intrusive GC in fully native applications running statically-compiled object code.

The main difference between Lisp and Objective-C is that Objective-C - being C - lets you access your run-time environment at a very low level without the GC machinery finding out. In Lisp, you don't have pointers, and the only way to allocate memory is to "cons" (at least from the programmer perspective). The Lisp cons cell is particularly easy to GC. Adding CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System) didn't impair GC in any way. The key issue is not native vs managed, nor the cons cell, but the "no pointer" model.

JD

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
      • From: Jens Alfke <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Why ARC over garbage collection? (From: Rick Mann <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Why ARC over garbage collection? (From: Fritz Anderson <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Why ARC over garbage collection? (From: Jens Alfke <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
  • Next by Date: Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
  • Next by thread: Re: Why ARC over garbage collection?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread