Re: cvs.transvirtual.com unreachable and other news

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Archie Cobbs (archie@whistle.com)
Date: Mon Oct 19 1998 - 12:35:12 EDT


Godmar Back writes:
> > It may actually be easier to use byte[] than to add finalizers to
> > all these objects, not to mention that using byte[] carries no
> > maintenance penalty, whereas remembering to free private memory
> > does.
> >
> > When you're talking about embedded systems, a slightly slower system
> > with no memory leaks is vastly preferable to the reverse.
>
> In most cases, you need special destructors anyway because the
> object referred to is something "special" that requires an explicit
> free operation, be it jthread_destroy or XWindowDestroy or whatever.

Hmm.. OK, but when there's some nasty memory leak that no one can
find because of this, I'll be the first to say 'I told you so' :-)

> That reminds me: do we free the backtraces if a throwable is gc'ed?
> I have to check that.

A perfect example. 1/2 :-)

-Archie

___________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 19:57:00 EDT