From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id XAA26866; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 23:16:45 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA26282 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 23:16:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from plinky.bolt-action.com (node-d8e9cca3.powerinter.net [216.233.204.163]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0PMGgf08121 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 23:16:43 +0100 (MET) Received: from checkerlap.d6.com (node-d8e9cca2.powerinter.net [216.233.204.162]) by plinky.bolt-action.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g0PMH1h22664; Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:17:02 -0800 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020125141112.030791f0@arda.pair.com> X-Sender: checker@arda.pair.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:16:25 -0800 To: Daniel Phillips , caml-list@inria.fr From: Chris Hecker Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml and games In-Reply-To: <20020126060133.365C.DAN@dgph.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020122204927.028b0db0@arda.pair.com> <00FC6BAE-0F80-11D6-86C2-00039354191C@usermail.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020122204927.028b0db0@arda.pair.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk >> The GC performance predicability and smoothness is a huge looming shadow on the horizon that may or may not materialize, I have no idea. >Do you have any specific thoughts on this that you can share yet? Have you done any tests? Nope. It's just that the "conventional wisdom" is that GC will hurt performance, so I'm worried just on principle. :) I haven't seen any indication that it will yet, however. As the other poster said, doing full collections between levels seems like a reasonable thing to try. I'm also slightly worried about the "write barrier" thing, which I've seen posted about but don't fully understand yet. To avoid GC activity I may want to keep some arrays around and reuse them, but apparently as they migrate into the old heap then you get the write barrier thing going on. Hopefully this won't be a problem either, but I don't know yet (I don't know if I understand it correctly yet, either). Lots of fun adventures on the horizon, I'm sure...just hopefully no show-stoppers. ;) Chris ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr