From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BA8D7EC6E for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 23:47:29 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of rich@annexia.org) identity=pra; client-ip=80.68.91.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="rich@annexia.org"; x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of rich@annexia.org designates 80.68.91.176 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=80.68.91.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="rich@annexia.org"; x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org) identity=helo; client-ip=80.68.91.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="rich@annexia.org"; x-sender="postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFADV3s1JQRFuw/2dsb2JhbABZgws4gxe2ZQiBFhZ0giUBAQEEOj8QCxgJExIPBSghiBsBCMp9F4YciHYHgyOBEwSYFYExkGSDKzw X-IPAS-Result: AgMFADV3s1JQRFuw/2dsb2JhbABZgws4gxe2ZQiBFhZ0giUBAQEEOj8QCxgJExIPBSghiBsBCMp9F4YciHYHgyOBEwSYFYExkGSDKzw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,515,1384297200"; d="scan'208";a="49783933" Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 19 Dec 2013 23:47:28 +0100 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VtmNL-0006Ff-3O; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:47:27 +0000 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 22:47:27 +0000 From: "Richard W.M. Jones" To: Gabriel Scherer Cc: Tom Ridge , caml-list Message-ID: <20131219224727.GA14006@annexia.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Question about garbage collection and impact on performance On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:48:49PM +0100, Gabriel Scherer wrote: > This was the topic of the following discussion a few years ago: > > http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/2720/can-the-cost-of-gc-be-neglected-when-analyzing-the-running-time-of-worst-case-da > > My personal impression is that the question is not that well-posed: > - if you assume infinite memory, you don't actually need a GC (and for any > input you can tweak the GC setting to make sure no collection happens) How could "infinite" memory be implemented without affecting the runtime of programs on such a machine? Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat