From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64DF3BB83 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:39:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.140]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k8I8d5rr026103 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:39:07 +0200 Received: from ppp14-47.lns2.syd7.internode.on.net (HELO rosella) ([59.167.14.47]) by ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 18 Sep 2006 18:08:58 +0930 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AY8CANP2DUU X-IronPort-AV: i="4.09,180,1157293800"; d="scan'208"; a="13995638:sNHT21074585" Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The Future Possibility of Concurrent Garbage Collection? From: skaller To: Hendrik Tews Cc: caml-list In-Reply-To: References: <891bd3390609150729k27b7acf8rc9b12f1e08eae93@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 18:38:54 +1000 Message-Id: <1158568734.15083.11.camel@rosella.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 450E5B2A.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; hendrik:01 tews:01 yaron:01 minsky:01 yminsky:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 compilers:01 afaik:01 2006:98 sourceforge:01 wrote:01 garbage:01 garbage:01 compile:01 On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 10:24 +0200, Hendrik Tews wrote: > "Yaron Minsky" writes: > > That said, I do understand that a concurrent GC is a big technical > challenge, and I can understand why the ocaml team isn't eager to take it on > right now. > > The ocaml team could document the GC interface and modularize > everything, such that the user can choose between different > garbage collectors (at compile time, or even better at > application start). I doubt this is possible with native code compilers. AFAIK allocation, write barrier, and int/box flag bit handling aren't modelled using standard C ABI calls? -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net