Browse thread
Obj.magic and existential types.
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jake Donham <jake@d...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Re: Obj.magic and existential types. |
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Daniel
Bünzli<daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch> wrote:
> Theoretically React may also work in browsers via o'browsers
> (http://ocsigen.org/obrowser) but I never tried.
I have not tried either, but from a cursory glance at the code I have
the impression that React's space safety relies on support for weak
references, which standard Javascript does not have.
> Correct me if I'm wrong but from my perspective froc is different from react
> in that it leaks memory (see example below) and is less thread friendly
> (because it uses global datastructures).
Less thread-friendly, sure. Leaks memory, yes in your example, but in
a less contrived usage, where dead references are underneath a bind,
froc cleans up after itself. E.g.:
open Froc_afp;;
let n = return 1;;
let i = return 0;;
let _ = i >>= fun i ->
let m = n >>= fun x -> return (x + 1) in
print_int (read m);
return ();;
let () =
let iref = ref 0 in
while true do
incr iref;
write i !iref;
propagate ();
Gc.full_major ();
done;;
As before a new value of m is created each time around the loop, but
since it is under the bind of i, froc is able to clean it up when i's
dependencies are recomputed.
Without weak references I don't know how else to implement space
safety. But I am prepared to be enlightened :). Best regards,
Jake