On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com>
wrote:
<snip>

> But in the case of memory management the two systems are very different.
> Spur can't support object age.  Spur provides pinning.  The two have very
> different garbage collectors and compactors.  In developing policy code to
> control the gcs it will inevitably require a different approach to
> effectively control either.  So in the realm of GC (including this, which
> is reporting GC stats) I think it makes sense to let them diverge.


So, would creating separate classes/pluggable instances for controlling
garbageCollection be worthwhile?  One is used for cog/nonSpur, one for
cog/Spur, one for (maybe) interpreter/Spur?

Wouldn't that let it be very focused, while still giving full relevance for
the other forks as needed? Or am I just missing the point here?

-cbc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20160129/fa4a0915/attachment.htm