Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Ask for a more efficient way to deallocate memory (full version)
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ask for a more efficient way to deallocate memory (full version)
Zitat von Richard Jones <rich@annexia.org>:

> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 05:33:21PM +0100, Oliver Bandel wrote:
> > Zitat von Fabrice Pardo <Fabrice.Pardo@Lpn.cnrs.fr>:
> >
> > [...]
> > > When using these kind of external C functions,
> > > OCaml seems then less comfortable to the programmer
> > > than reference counted languages.
> >
> > I doubt that reference-count is the reason here.
> > perl also uses reference count, but Filehandles
> > and Dirhandles have to be closed with close / closedir.
>
> This isn't true.  In Perl file handles are closed at the end of a
> scope if they are no longer used.  In other words a Perl-equivalent
> to
> this loop will never use more than a single file descriptor:
>
>   while (true) {
>     open "foo"
>   }


Oh, so I was wrong here. :(

Perl handles Filehandles in a special way (not as other
things in perl), and I thought it also handles Filehandles
different, in respect to reference counting.

Well, some details I've forgotten during the time I rather
used OCaml instead of Perl ;-(

Thanks for the correction.


[...]
> There is a really good paper on this subject -- how ref counting and
> garbage collection are orthogonal language concepts
[...]

That was, what I wanted to express, but my example
was wrong.

Ciao,
   Oliver