home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.emf.net!johnm
- From: johnm@mitchell.org (John D. Mitchell)
- Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java
- Subject: Re: Java: What's the Big Deal?
- Followup-To: comp.lang.java
- Date: 31 Mar 1996 05:24:58 GMT
- Organization: Mitchell Research
- Message-ID: <slrn4ls5to.hlk.johnm@mitchell.org>
- References: <4i40ik$9dt@news4.digex.net> <milodDo5yDE.H8B@netcom.com> <1996Mar14.124235.9729@friend.kastle.com> <4iane3$dr4@news4.digex.net> <E91P8DA2VPSxEw+C@almide.demon.co.uk> <4ihuhp$gi5@stuyvesant.denhaag.dataweb.net> <314CACBC.503E@mindspring.com> <3153f313.19668948@news.iol.it>
- Reply-To: johnm@mitchell.org
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.149.2.3
- X-Newsreader: slrn (0.8.4)
-
- In article <3153f313.19668948@news.iol.it>, Nik Shaylor - Florence - Italy
- wrote:
- [...]
- >> will certainly be a performance problem
- >>compared to well written C++ programs.
-
- Myth.
-
-
- >If you do not not use the new operator (a lot) do you still make
- >garbage? I presume that the stack frames are not allocated from the
- >heap.
-
- It depends on the language. Of course, it's easy to have 'hidden' garbage
- being generated in C++ just by using somebody's library package.
-
-
- >If that is true is it not the case that a gc would be faster than
- >malloc/free?
-
- The general consensus is that it depends on a lot of factors.
-
- There's been a lot of discussion about this on the GC mailing list and, if
- I recall correctly, a GC FAQ is being put together.
-
- You might was to start by checking out Paul Wilson's GC survey papers,
- http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/oops/papers.html
-
-
- Hope this helps,
- John
-
-