Hi, "Kjetil S. Matheussen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, but for some kinds of software, like programs with custom gui's, > sound processing programs, interactive graphical programs, > interactivety is exclusively more important than those two. I consider > the freeze that the guile's built-in gc cause to be its biggest > problem. > > In fact, I don't think execution time is an important factor here at > all. Don't get me wrong, of course execution time is important in > general, but a change in execution time of a gc benchmark program > within the factor of two sounds like an insignificant difference > compared to what is gained in interactivity. Right, "interactivity" may be an important metric for some classes of applications, albeit one that can sometimes be hard to capture. That said, I guess a "large fraction" of Guile users will be even more concerned about memory consumption and execution time. > I'm going to run Guile + Boehm GC + SND for a while now and report > back if anything unusual happens. I might even release a special > version of SND with guile + the Boehm GC included to the public in the > near future, because of the huge advantages it has. This might > generate a lot of feedback. And if no one reports back, then its a > good sign that it works well. Alright, I'll wait for bug reports. ;-) > Actually, I haven't used guile for other interactive stuff than > snd. And snd is huge. It could be that the boehm gc works a lot lot > better for really large programs than guile's gc. I'll try to run the > gc benchmark program inside snd (with lots of scheme files loaded), it > might give some interesting results. Cool, let us know how it goes. I'll probably sync my `boehm-gc' branch with HEAD one of these days, too (I think it doesn't lack a lot of upstream changes anyway). Thanks! Ludovic. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
