Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #1759

Re: reference count size

Show all headers | View raw

Robert Wessel wrote:

> 64 bit systems are all over the place.  I've seen 32, 40, 48 and 64
> bit reference counts, although 32 may be the most common for now (in
> both the 48 and 64 bit cases some bits nominally in the count field
> were repurposed).

Interested to know where you've seen these choices ?

To my knowledge, such as it is, reference-counting has all but died out.  The 
exceptions being more-or-less ad-hoc solutions to problems requiring GC in 
languages which don't have it (e.g. COM); highly specialised domains (such as 
Unix I-Nodes); and optimisations in "real" GC (which use only one or two bits + 
saturation).

    -- chris 

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

reference count size bob <bob@coolfone.comze.com> - 2012-06-07 08:42 -0700
  Re: reference count size "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-07 17:23 +0100
    Re: reference count size BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-07 23:55 -0500
      Re: reference count size "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-06-08 16:52 +0100
        Re: reference count size BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-09 09:11 -0500
  Re: reference count size Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-06-07 11:32 -0500
    Re: reference count size "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2012-06-09 10:29 +0100
      Re: reference count size Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-09 21:43 +1200
  Re: reference count size JJ <jaejunks@googlemail.com> - 2012-06-08 01:46 +0700
    Re: reference count size Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-06-07 18:52 +0000

csiph-web