Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by taejo on Friday September 17, 2021 @07:44AM
(#28564263)
It may be constructive to say what you do do, instead of leaving us to guess and telling us we're wrong.
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by ncmncm on Friday September 17, 2021 @07:51AM
(#28564339)
I mostly use "}".
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by post-it on Friday September 17, 2021 @08:47AM
(#28564815)
You write programs so short and uncomplex that you rarely need to free memory?
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by BenjiWiebe on Friday September 17, 2021 @09:29AM
(#28565233)
I interpret it as meaning they don't use dynamic memory allocation.
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by ncmncm on Friday September 17, 2021 @05:49PM
(#28571280)
False. Use of dynamic memory allocation without GC, without reference-counting (which is GC) and without manual memory management is the usual practice in C++ and Rust.
Reference-counting GC is available when it is not too costly, which is common, and more convenient, which is rare. Ordinary automatically-generated destructors handle almost everything, almost all the time. Once in a great while, performance demands a concession such as an arena allocator, which also is not "manual memory management", and also not GC, and is radically cheaper than either one.
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by pwdisswordfish8 on Friday September 17, 2021 @09:15AM
(#28565097)
Ever heard of RAII?
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by maleldil on Friday September 17, 2021 @10:31AM
(#28565925)
That's still memory management, because you need to worry about lifetimes.
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by ncmncm on Friday September 17, 2021 @05:50PM
(#28571289)
It is automated, not manual, memory management. Just not GC.
Re:Shenandoah in OpenJDK 17: Sub-millisecond GC pauses
by hiptobecubic on Friday September 17, 2021 @11:46AM
(#28566835)
You only need to worry that data that you need doesn't go out of scope.
And, I don't "do my own memory management". I just don't rely on a GC to do it.