U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Status & Roadmap

Authors & License

Funding Ultimate++

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » U++ Library support » U++ Core » Ptr improve

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Return to the default flat view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: Ptr improve [message #32560 is a reply to message #32556]

Tue, 24 May 2011 22:44

cbpporter is currently offline

cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

Well, I guess you don't like my idea Smile

Smile

. It has been on my mind for some time. I am wondering if we could get a best of both worlds scenario out of this.

There is no need for writing compilers or libraries. Allocating memory without a container or a smart pointer and not freeing it would still be a memory leek. What I want is to delay the free operation. It does not have anything to do with pointer casting.

GC proponents have been hyping at least three things: no memory leaks, the advantage on parallel computing caused by a functional style combined with GC enabled more frequent allocations done to enable immutable data structures and and the responsiveness of allocation and deallocation. I was wondering if we could get some of that final point with what we have in U++ and test if it does bring an advantage or not. Seems like a fun experiment. We would need a very fast allocator, even at the price of a very slow deallocator.

And yes, my approach would need the use of Shared or a similar "rich pointer". Just using normal C pointer would be as bad of an idea as using them in normal U+ code to manage memory.

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

[Message index]

		Ptr improve By: tojocky on Mon, 16 May 2011 14:07
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Mon, 16 May 2011 15:05
		Re: Ptr improve By: tojocky on Mon, 16 May 2011 15:31
		Re: Ptr improve By: tojocky on Mon, 16 May 2011 16:06
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Mon, 16 May 2011 23:13
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Wed, 18 May 2011 11:40
		Re: Ptr improve By: tojocky on Wed, 18 May 2011 13:12
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Thu, 19 May 2011 19:09
		Re: Ptr improve By: tojocky on Fri, 20 May 2011 08:32
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Fri, 20 May 2011 11:04
		Re: Ptr improve By: cbpporter on Fri, 20 May 2011 11:51
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Fri, 20 May 2011 13:03
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Fri, 20 May 2011 13:19
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Fri, 20 May 2011 14:43
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Mon, 23 May 2011 13:34
		Re: Ptr improve By: cbpporter on Mon, 23 May 2011 13:52
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Mon, 23 May 2011 15:23
		Re: Ptr improve By: dolik.rce on Mon, 23 May 2011 18:26
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Mon, 23 May 2011 22:37
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Mon, 23 May 2011 22:41
		Re: Ptr improve By: cbpporter on Tue, 24 May 2011 09:25
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Tue, 24 May 2011 17:46
		Re: Ptr improve By: mr_ped on Tue, 24 May 2011 18:28
		Re: Ptr improve By: cbpporter on Tue, 24 May 2011 22:44
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Sat, 28 May 2011 20:57
		Re: Ptr improve By: mr_ped on Wed, 25 May 2011 09:34
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Wed, 25 May 2011 10:27
		Re: Ptr improve By: cbpporter on Wed, 25 May 2011 12:09
		Re: Ptr improve By: kohait00 on Wed, 25 May 2011 12:19
		Re: Ptr improve By: mirek on Sat, 28 May 2011 21:10

Previous Topic:	FIX: UPP::Scan returns int64 for INT_V
Next Topic:	GetCurrentDirectory() Doesn't contain the \ is this a bug?

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

PDF

]

Current Time: Wed Apr 30 03:42:25 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01155 seconds