[MUD-Dev] New Beginings

Miroslav Silovic miro at vams.com
Thu Jun 6 14:44:42 New Zealand Standard Time 2002


David B. Held wrote:

> And that if you really prefer GC, or happen to think it is the
> best solution for a given problem, you can still opt to use it in
> C++.

There is currently no C++ garbage collector that has all of the
following properties:

  - precise
  - concurrent (or at least incremental)
  - compacting
  - generational
  - does not require code reengineering to integrate

Boehm's does 2 out of the 5 above (3 if you don't want to bother
with manually marking refs pointed by each class, at a considerable
loss of precision).

That said, I also don't think that a single language across the
entire application has any advantages, especially if you have a good
facility for interfacing bits of code written in multiple
languages. On the other hand, being able to write various levels of
your applications in a language of the appropriate level has a very
neat consequence of making it easy to mix paradigms in a trully
natural way. In particular, LISP and C combo has worked extremely
well for me in the past.

That said, lately I just use C++, smart pointers, and valgrind
muchly.  Not that I won't interface everything I wrote to LISP,
eventually.

    Miro


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list