From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4773 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2011 06:20:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 4760 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Oct 2011 06:20:38 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (HELO mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr) (192.134.164.105) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:20:19 +0000 Received: from ip-133.net-81-220-116.brest.rev.numericable.fr (HELO laptop-mg.local) ([81.220.116.133]) by mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 21 Oct 2011 08:20:16 +0200 Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:24:00 -0000 From: Marc Glisse Reply-To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org To: Basile Starynkevitch cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: adding destroyable objects into Ggc In-Reply-To: <20111021080914.08528e83f5eb53897d92fee9@starynkevitch.net> Message-ID: References: <20111018171201.361304028ab94f102f827bd2@starynkevitch.net> <20111018191350.470cd6b1cd291373d5ff3f2c@starynkevitch.net> <20111020080753.a895eae452bb25e312ebf617@starynkevitch.net> <20111020081245.GA12085@ours.starynkevitch.net> <20111020085324.GA12472@ours.starynkevitch.net> <20111021080914.08528e83f5eb53897d92fee9@starynkevitch.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00376.txt.bz2 On Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Basile Starynkevitch wrote: [explanations about the limitations of ggc] > Or did I not understood something about your question? No, it is just that I didn't know the limitations of ggc and was thinking of more general garbage collectors, where this is not an issue. Thanks for bearing with my questions. -- Marc Glisse