From:	"Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
To:	DJGPP Workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Date:	Sat, 6 May 2000 09:37:18 -0400
MIME-Version:	1.0
Subject:	Re: Perfomance of gc-simple
Message-ID:	<3913E7CE.14467.E8926@localhost>
In-reply-to:	<3913BE88.44A89056@softhome.net>
X-mailer:	Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> This is not the way to go. Does anyone have any advices how to speed it up? I
> recall Alexandre Oliva starting discussion about making gc-page use simple
> malloc(), what about that?
> 

If an implementation using malloc() isn't in the offing, it would seem we 
either need a mmap or vmalloc implemention so C++ and the other languages 
that are being converted to use GC can work in an acceptable amount of time. 
I know an implementation of  mmap that can be shared between other processes 
is impossible to implement with DPMI 0.9, but what about when memory is 
private to the process like gcc's GC? vmalloc can certainly be implemented, 
but at the cost of wasting space to have the returned pointer aligned to the 
page boundary.

- Raw text -