[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2009-04-11 (19:18) |
From: | Ed Keith <e_d_k@y...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] OCaml and Boehm |
--- On Sat, 4/11/09, Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> > Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml and Boehm > To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr > Date: Saturday, April 11, 2009, 10:27 AM > > Also, don't forget that many people incorrectly claim that smart pointers > deallocate at the earliest possible point when, in fact, they typically keep > values alive longer than necessary. Could elaborate on this? I'm having a hard time envisioning a situation where GC could free memory that smart pointers would not free. -EdK Ed Keith e_d_k@yahoo.com Blog: edkeith.blogspot.com