harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] Is it time to say goodbye to dear friend GC v4?
Date Fri, 03 Nov 2006 12:08:42 GMT


Nikolay Kuznetsov wrote:
> Let me answer for Artem :), he is on vacation and most probably won't
> answer soon.
> We do occasionally use GCv4 to verify some threading issues, since
> native threading resource allocation depends on "weak references".
> Thus I would agree with Ivan, that sometimes it is helpful to switch
> to different code base(which is handy and considered to be stable
> enough), but if gcv4 won't be supported any more why don't drop it
> having in mind that one can always take older revisions from SVN.
> 
> +1 for dropping GCv4

 From that argument, I'm now against dropping GCv4, if you actually get 
use out of it for verification of threading or other important issues.

Yes, you can always take older revisions, but that's a pain, and if that 
is a "speedbump" that prevents you from doing those extra tests or 
verifications, I'd rather keep it around as a convenience for you. :)

Seriously - if you need it, lets keep it.

geir

> 
> Nik.
> 
> On 11/2/06, Ivan Volosyuk <ivan.volosyuk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would like to know the opinion of Artem, Salikh and Alexey
>> Ignatenko. They have used the GC and may have reasons to keep it.
>>
>> As for me, I occasionally use it (GCv4) and a modified version of
>> GCv4.1 (which can help detect heap access via lost pointers). Most of
>> the time I prefer second one, but sometimes it is helpful to run with
>> completely different code base. I didn't try GCv5 yet. If it stable I
>> will switch to it.
>>
>> -- 
>> Ivan
>>
>> On 11/2/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>> > Is there any reason to keep this around in the main branch?
>>
> 

Mime
View raw message