On Thu, 9 Mar 2000 nascheme@enme.ucalgary.ca wrote: >... > If the programmer can or does not redesign their classes I don't > think it is unreasonable to leak memory. We can link these > cycles to a global list of garbage or print a debugging message. > This is a large improvement over the current situation (ie. > leaking memory with no debugging even for cycles without > finalizers). I think we throw an error (as a subclass of MemoryError). As an alternative, is it possible to move those cycles to the garbage list and then never look at them again? That would speed up future collection processing. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4