On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:09:15PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
> There was a language long ago, predating Lisp, that used reference
> counting for memory management. I forget what it was called. Could it
> have been IPL-V?
Yes! It was IPL-V (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Processin
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 06:19:02PM +0200, Rüdiger Asche wrote:
> >
> >For complete precision: I meant "may" in the sense of "P |= memory
> >is useful" as opposed to "P |- memory is useful" -- i.e., just
> >because a program may not need a chunk of memory for the remainder
> >of the computation does
On Jul 23, 2012, at 2:36 PM, Rüdiger Asche wrote:
>
> You seem to be asking for Pascal or C/C++. Then again, is it possible that
> "critical" regions of your program could be managed via finalizers and your
> own memory administration? Giving up even one iota of GC soundness, sounds
> like gi
You seem to be asking for Pascal or C/C++. Then again, is it possible that
"critical" regions of your program could be managed via finalizers and your
own memory administration? Giving up even one iota of GC soundness, sounds
like giving up all of memory soundness though it's possible I am ove
On Jul 23, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Rüdiger Asche wrote:
>>
>> For complete precision: I meant "may" in the sense of "P |= memory is
>> useful" as opposed to "P |- memory is useful" -- i.e., just because a
>> program may not need a chunk of memory for the remainder of the computation
>> does not me
For complete precision: I meant "may" in the sense of "P |= memory is
useful" as opposed to "P |- memory is useful" -- i.e., just because a
program may not need a chunk of memory for the remainder of the
computation does not mean it is provably so. In this spirit, the word
"conservative" is a
COMMERCIAL USERS OF FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING 2012
CUFP 2012
http://cufp.org/conference
CALL FOR PARTICIPATION
Copenhagen, Denmark
Sep 13-15
On Jul 23, 2012, at 12:09 AM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> On 07/22/2012 04:43 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 22, 2012, at 4:21 PM, Harry Spier wrote:
>>
>>> 1) If [some memory is no longer being referred to], does that always ensure
>>> that doing a (collect-garbage) will reclaim the mem
8 matches
Mail list logo