From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Tolpin <dvd@davidashen.net>
Message-Id: <200403020812.i228CiXH071469@adat.davidashen.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: advantages of limbo
In-Reply-To: <2bd2a38e5c4e46d0eb327141cdd2bb97@terzarima.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R
Date: Tue,  2 Mar 2004 12:12:44 +0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0a80a1e4-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> >>garbage collector. It uses keyword cyclic because garbage collector
> >>needs it. 
>
> no, absolutely not.  it has no effect at run-time and does not appear in the
> dis files or anywhere else at run-time.   all it does is suppress a diagnostic
> at compile-time, so that a programmer who is anxious to avoid creating
> cyclic data (if only by accident) can have that checked at compile time, and
> it provides a similar cue for a reader.  on the other hand, the presence
> of cyclic does not mean it will necessarily be cyclic, just that the compiler
> cannot determine it will not.

Is there any other reason for a programmer to be anxious to avoid
creating cyclic data than reference-counting garbage collection?