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

Groups > comp.programming > #8748 > unrolled thread

Xamarin uses a garbage collector

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  Xamarin uses a garbage collector Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com> - 2018-05-02 20:00 -0400
    Xamarin uses a garbage collector Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2018-05-02 17:35 -0700
      Re: Xamarin uses a garbage collector Sky89 <Sky89@sky68.com> - 2018-05-02 21:08 -0400

#8748 — Xamarin uses a garbage collector

Hello,


Xamarin uses a garbage collector this is why it has a big disadvantage:

https://www.xamarin.com/

Read again to understand better what i want to say:

I am a more experienced programmer now, and i can tell you this: if you
want to compare programming languages , that's not enough, you
have to be more smart, if you want to be able to
do Rapid Application Development and avoid the disadvantages
of garbage collectors, i will advice you to use Lazarus and/or
C++Builder and/or Delphi , they are now like the best on this ! this is 
why i am using them, they are better than Visual C++ on RAD and they are 
more capable programming languages that come with a sophisticated RAD 
and IDE , for example Lazarus works on Windows and Mac OS X and Linux, 
look for example at Lazarus here:


http://www.lazarus-ide.org/


And don't forget what i have said before about the disadvantages of GC 
to understand better why C++Builder and Delphi and Lazarus are very useful:

"Perhaps the most significant problem is that programs that rely on 
garbage collectors often exhibit poor locality (interacting badly with 
cache and virtual memory systems), occupy more address space than the 
program actually uses at any one time, and touch otherwise idle pages. 
These may combine in a phenomenon called thrashing, in which a program 
spends more time copying data between various grades of storage than 
performing useful work. They may make it impossible for a programmer to 
reason about the performance effects of design choices, making 
performance tuning difficult. They can lead garbage-collecting programs 
to interfere with other programs competing for resources"


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8750

Alex, I'll take "Why is mark and sweep more appalling than women wearing leggings as pants for $200."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8751

On 5/2/2018 8:35 PM, Chad wrote:
> Alex, I'll take "Why is mark and sweep more appalling than women wearing leggings as pants for $200."
> 

"I think it's worth noting that all MarkAndSweep algorithms have an 
execution time proportional to the size of the entire object space 
rather than the number of live objects. This (in addition to the need to 
pause system operation while executing) makes them less attractive than 
the various semi-space scavenging algorithms that copy live objects from 
"from space" to "to space". No such pauses are needed, and execution 
time is proportional to the number of live objects rather than available 
space. A price paid for this advantage is a factor of two increase in 
the available memory required."


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web