Re: GC "survey"

[paul@...]

Yes, the methods you described will definitely make it a much
better implementation. Looking forward to the good news once 
you start working on this ;-)

Regards,
.paul.

On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 12:03:13PM -0400, Thatcher Ulrich wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2002 at 12:56 +0800, paul@theV.net wrote:
> > 
> > The link'd gone dead a few months back when I went for vacation. It
> > has been up and running after I returned :-P 
> > 
> > 	http://www.gime.org/twiki/bin/view/Gime/WebDownload
> 
> I took a quick look through the diff -- it looks promising.  I think
> the size of the collection data within objects can be condensed to
> just two pointers (one of which replaces the existing "mark"
> pointer).  The idea is to keep separate lists for each type of object
> (thus eliminating the vtype variable) and not storing an explicit
> "marked" value -- instead, the marked status is determined by which
> list the object is linked into (white, gray, or black).
> 
> Hopefully I will get a chance to fiddle around with this in the near
> future.  I think the first task is to make a "luaC_checkinvariants()"
> function, which does an expensive traversal of everything and ensures
> that the GC state is consistent.  This would be used only for
> debugging.  Then, assemble a test suite and run it, calling
> luaC_checkinvariants very frequently.  Hopefully this will smoke out
> any missing write barriers.
> 
> Thanks for posting your stuff!
> 
> -- 
> Thatcher Ulrich
> http://tulrich.com