www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Google Chrome and process-based design

reply "Denis Koroskin" <2korden gmail.com> writes:
You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome  
browser.
Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,  
Windows only for now).

It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each window,  
each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin crashes, nothing  
bad happens. The browser continues working as if nothing changes. It even  
has a built-in process manager, try opening youtube.com and killing a  
flash player plugin.

You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is what  
D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.
Sep 03 2008
next sibling parent bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Denis Koroskin:

Beware that it installs some kind of resident shit, that you have to hunt down
using spyware-removal programs, in three different directories, that runs at
the startup and pings home, and doesn't get removed after the uninstall. So
beside having a really fast JavaScript interpreter (about 20 times faster than
the one of Firefox 2) it's a kind of virus.

Bye,
bearophile
Sep 03 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> writes:
Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome 
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/, 
 Windows only for now).
 
 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each window, 
 each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin crashes, 
 nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if nothing 
 changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening youtube.com 
 and killing a flash player plugin.
 
 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
 
 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is what 
 D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


It's funny, just a week ago or so Bartosz Milewski published a blog 
entry about how processes scale better than threads..

I tried Chrome and I'm really impressed by how responsive it is. Also, 
the UI is kept very minimalistic, yet it doesn't lack any features. The 
website-application feature is also a very handy thing.

Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would 
love having a D port. :P
Sep 03 2008
next sibling parent reply davidl <davidl 126.com> writes:
在 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:08:27 +0800，Alexander Panek  
<alexander.panek brainsware.org> 写道:


 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome  
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,  
 Windows only for now).
  It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each  
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin  
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if  
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening  
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.
  You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
  This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is  
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's funny, just a week ago or so Bartosz Milewski published a blog  
 entry about how processes scale better than threads..

 I tried Chrome and I'm really impressed by how responsive it is. Also,  
 the UI is kept very minimalistic, yet it doesn't lack any features. The  
 website-application feature is also a very handy thing.

 Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would  
 love having a D port. :P


Who will ever want to port a such big project? 437MB Source tarball(WTF, a  
browser bigger than OS source base)

Google goes the wrong way. It just extends the current web crap not  
reinvent something smarter.


-- 
使用 Opera 革命性的电子邮件客户程序: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Sep 03 2008
next sibling parent reply Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> writes:
davidl wrote:

 在 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:08:27 +0800，Alexander Panek 
 <alexander.panek brainsware.org> 写道:
 

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome 
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/, 
 Windows only for now).
  It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each 
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin 
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if 
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening 
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.
  You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
  This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is 
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's funny, just a week ago or so Bartosz Milewski published a blog 
 entry about how processes scale better than threads..

 I tried Chrome and I'm really impressed by how responsive it is. Also, 
 the UI is kept very minimalistic, yet it doesn't lack any features. 
 The website-application feature is also a very handy thing.

 Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would 
 love having a D port. :P


 
 Who will ever want to port a such big project? 437MB Source tarball(WTF, 
 a browser bigger than OS source base)


I suppose you noticed the emoticon (":P") at the end of that sentence.



 Google goes the wrong way. It just extends the current web crap not 
 reinvent something smarter.


Wrong or right, it doesn't extend anything. Google just happened to 
release a new, blazingly fast browser. I don't know in what way this can 
be attributed as "web crap" or similar. Do you have any better idea?
Sep 03 2008
parent reply "Chris R. Miller" <lordSaurontheGreat gmail.com> writes:
Alexander Panek wrote:

 davidl wrote:

 =E5=9C=A8 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:08:27 +0800=EF=BC=8CAlexander Panek
 <alexander.panek brainsware.org> =E5=86=99=E9=81=93:

 Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would
 love having a D port. :P


 Who will ever want to port a such big project? 437MB Source
 tarball(WTF, a browser bigger than OS source base)


=20
 I suppose you noticed the emoticon (":P") at the end of that sentence.


437MB?  I gotta go check that out (as in verify, not load my poor disk
with even more stuff).


 Google goes the wrong way. It just extends the current web crap not
 reinvent something smarter.


=20
 Wrong or right, it doesn't extend anything. Google just happened to
 release a new, blazingly fast browser. I don't know in what way this ca=


n

 be attributed as "web crap" or similar. Do you have any better idea?


It's great for Google!  Now Mozilla can use the lessons learned from
Chrome to make Firefox better!  Chrome is Google saying "we want a
better browser.  So we made a proof of concept for you to both copy and
improve upon."  I don't think Google is fixated upon webkit at all.
They just wanted something quick and easy that they could pop into
Chrome, which is mainly about the simplified interface, more survivable
process-based design, and the much-faster JavaScript engine.

Because Chrome is Open-Source, I see no reason why the Mozilla team and
the Chrome team cannot benefit from a little synergy as they learn from
each other to build better browsers.  True, it's competition, but it's
/Open-Source/ competition, the kind where everyone wins.
Sep 03 2008
parent reply "Chris R. Miller" <lordSaurontheGreat gmail.com> writes:
Chris R. Miller wrote:

 Alexander Panek wrote:

 davidl wrote:

 =E5=9C=A8 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:08:27 +0800=EF=BC=8CAlexander Panek
 <alexander.panek brainsware.org> =E5=86=99=E9=81=93:

 Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would=









 love having a D port. :P


 Who will ever want to port a such big project? 437MB Source
 tarball(WTF, a browser bigger than OS source base)


 I suppose you noticed the emoticon (":P") at the end of that sentence.=





=20
 437MB?  I gotta go check that out (as in verify, not load my poor disk
 with even more stuff).


I ran, I checked, I became intrigued, so I downloaded and decompressed.

Firstly, it's 1.682 GB of raw sources.

Secondly, I ran an HDGraph scan of the tree to see where everything is.

199.16 MB of hunspell dictionaries
147.46 MB of Chrome test data
228.31 MB of Chrome tools test data marked as a "reference build"
147.87 MB of webkit layout test results data
=3D 722.8 MB of non-code data

Therefore 1.682 GB - 722.8 MB =3D 959.2 MB total of source code

The Chrome source itself, minus the data and tools data, etc. is only
57.75 MB of source code for the browser itself.  The rest is third party
libraries, such as Cygwin libraries and what looks to be the better part
of 77 MB of a Perl interpreter and attached libraries, 158 MB of "icu38"
library sources, etc.  It's really no wonder it's such a large download,
since all you need to build the browser is MSVC 2005 and the Windows
SDK.  Otherwise you don't need to go download any of the other things
yourself.  So on closer inspection is does seem like a more appropriate
level of data for a browser.

Looking at a few of the source files individually, it does appear that
much of the code is reasonable, and that most of the data is just tools
for unit tests, etc.

Just thought I'd share.
Sep 03 2008
parent renoX <renosky free.fr> writes:
Chris R. Miller a écrit :

 Chris R. Miller wrote:

 Alexander Panek wrote:

 davidl wrote:

 在 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:08:27 +0800，Alexander Panek
 <alexander.panek brainsware.org> 写道:

 Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would
 love having a D port. :P


 Who will ever want to port a such big project? 437MB Source
 tarball(WTF, a browser bigger than OS source base)


 I suppose you noticed the emoticon (":P") at the end of that sentence.


 437MB?  I gotta go check that out (as in verify, not load my poor disk
 with even more stuff).


 
 I ran, I checked, I became intrigued, so I downloaded and decompressed.
 
 Firstly, it's 1.682 GB of raw sources.
 
 Secondly, I ran an HDGraph scan of the tree to see where everything is.
 
 199.16 MB of hunspell dictionaries
 147.46 MB of Chrome test data
 228.31 MB of Chrome tools test data marked as a "reference build"
 147.87 MB of webkit layout test results data
 = 722.8 MB of non-code data
 
 Therefore 1.682 GB - 722.8 MB = 959.2 MB total of source code
 
 The Chrome source itself, minus the data and tools data, etc. is only
 57.75 MB of source code for the browser itself.  The rest is third party
 libraries, such as Cygwin libraries and what looks to be the better part
 of 77 MB of a Perl interpreter and attached libraries, 158 MB of "icu38"
 library sources, etc.  It's really no wonder it's such a large download,
 since all you need to build the browser is MSVC 2005 and the Windows
 SDK.  Otherwise you don't need to go download any of the other things
 yourself.  So on closer inspection is does seem like a more appropriate
 level of data for a browser.
 
 Looking at a few of the source files individually, it does appear that
 much of the code is reasonable, and that most of the data is just tools
 for unit tests, etc.
 
 Just thought I'd share.


Thanks a lot for this detailed explanation.

BR,
renoX
Sep 19 2008
prev sibling parent "Bruce Adams" <tortoise_74 yeah.who.co.uk> writes:
On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:46:57 +0100, davidl <davidl 126.com> wrote:


 在 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:08:27 +0800，Alexander Panek  
 <alexander.panek brainsware.org> 写道:


 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome  
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,  
 Windows only for now).
  It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each  
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin  
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if  
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening  
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.
  You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
  This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is  
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's funny, just a week ago or so Bartosz Milewski published a blog  
 entry about how processes scale better than threads..

 I tried Chrome and I'm really impressed by how responsive it is. Also,  
 the UI is kept very minimalistic, yet it doesn't lack any features. The  
 website-application feature is also a very handy thing.

 Overall, I'd say Google Chrome is quite an impressive product. Would  
 love having a D port. :P


 Who will ever want to port a such big project? 437MB Source tarball(WTF,  
 a browser bigger than OS source base)

 Google goes the wrong way. It just extends the current web crap not  
 reinvent something smarter.


Porting code is a lot easier than writing code from scratch, though it  
assumes you have a
good design and a good reason to port. Assuming the design is adequate the  
reason to port
would be to demonstrate why D was a better langage than whatever its  
written in. They
don't seem keen to advertise it but it looks like C++ from a quick google.
Sep 06 2008
prev sibling parent "Chris R. Miller" <lordSaurontheGreat gmail.com> writes:
Alexander Panek wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,
 Windows only for now).

 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


=20
 It's funny, just a week ago or so Bartosz Milewski published a blog
 entry about how processes scale better than threads..
=20
 I tried Chrome and I'm really impressed by how responsive it is. Also,
 the UI is kept very minimalistic, yet it doesn't lack any features. The=



 website-application feature is also a very handy thing.


I'd like it better if it had the Safari-like progress meter in the
location bar.  IE/FF/Chrome just have a spinning device... so does that
mean I can expect it to take an infinitely long time to load and render?
 Safari at least shows how close to completion it is with the finite
progress bar.  For some pages it's really nice to see how far it gets
before hanging up.  It helps in diagnostics, too.
Sep 03 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:
Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome 
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/, 
 Windows only for now).
 
 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each window, 
 each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin crashes, 
 nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if nothing 
 changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening youtube.com 
 and killing a flash player plugin.
 
 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
 
 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is what 
 D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


It's probably worth mentioning that IE has offered an option to make 
each window its own process for as long as I can remember.  That said, 
the idea of rethinking browsers in general is a good one, if "web as a 
platform" is ever going to make headway.


Sean
Sep 03 2008
parent reply "Chris R. Miller" <lordSaurontheGreat gmail.com> writes:
Sean Kelly wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,
 Windows only for now).

 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


=20
 It's probably worth mentioning that IE has offered an option to make
 each window its own process for as long as I can remember.  That said,
 the idea of rethinking browsers in general is a good one, if "web as a
 platform" is ever going to make headway.


Ehrm, I think that the Window as a Process feature is in Explorer only,
not Internet Explorer.  I quickly checked my Internet Explorer and
didn't find that feature (though I know it's there for just plain-old
Explorer).  Explorer isn't a web browser AFAIK, so IE really hasn't been
doing anything special along those lines.
Sep 03 2008
next sibling parent reply Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
Chris R. Miller wrote:

 Sean Kelly wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,
 Windows only for now).

 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's probably worth mentioning that IE has offered an option to make
 each window its own process for as long as I can remember.  That said,
 the idea of rethinking browsers in general is a good one, if "web as a
 platform" is ever going to make headway.


 
 Ehrm, I think that the Window as a Process feature is in Explorer only,
 not Internet Explorer.  I quickly checked my Internet Explorer and
 didn't find that feature (though I know it's there for just plain-old
 Explorer).  Explorer isn't a web browser AFAIK, so IE really hasn't been
 doing anything special along those lines.
 


Internet Explorer 8 has tabs-as-processes and windows as processes. 7- 
work like traditional browsers.
Sep 03 2008
parent "Chris R. Miller" <lordSaurontheGreat gmail.com> writes:
Robert Fraser wrote:

 Chris R. Miller wrote:

 Sean Kelly wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/=








,

 Windows only for now).

 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening=









 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's probably worth mentioning that IE has offered an option to make
 each window its own process for as long as I can remember.  That said=






,

 the idea of rethinking browsers in general is a good one, if "web as =






a

 platform" is ever going to make headway.


 Ehrm, I think that the Window as a Process feature is in Explorer only=




,

 not Internet Explorer.  I quickly checked my Internet Explorer and
 didn't find that feature (though I know it's there for just plain-old
 Explorer).  Explorer isn't a web browser AFAIK, so IE really hasn't be=




en

 doing anything special along those lines.


=20
 Internet Explorer 8 has tabs-as-processes and windows as processes. 7-
 work like traditional browsers.


Interesting.  I hope they kept the memory use down.  I warmed up IE7
from a five-month period of inactivity and used Chrome to monitor its
memory use.  I opened up the same pages as I had in Chrome (with the
exception of the memory window) and found IE to use less memory by
almost 15 MB.  Then again, I had been using Chrome for a while, and it
was a fresh instance of IE.  But a 15MB disparity I didn't think I could
resolve by restarting Chrome.
Sep 03 2008
prev sibling parent reply Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:
Chris R. Miller wrote:

 Sean Kelly wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,
 Windows only for now).

 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's probably worth mentioning that IE has offered an option to make
 each window its own process for as long as I can remember.  That said,
 the idea of rethinking browsers in general is a good one, if "web as a
 platform" is ever going to make headway.


 
 Ehrm, I think that the Window as a Process feature is in Explorer only,
 not Internet Explorer.  I quickly checked my Internet Explorer and
 didn't find that feature (though I know it's there for just plain-old
 Explorer).  Explorer isn't a web browser AFAIK, so IE really hasn't been
 doing anything special along those lines.


Huh... I could have sworn there was an IE setting for this.  Ah well.


Sean
Sep 03 2008
parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
Sean Kelly wrote:

 Chris R. Miller wrote:

 Sean Kelly wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:

 You already know that Google is making a buzz with their new Chrome
 browser.
 Go download and test it if you didn't do yet (www.google.com/chrome/,
 Windows only for now).

 It is heavily multi-threaded and uses separate process for each
 window, each tab, each plugin etc. When one tab hags or a plugin
 crashes, nothing bad happens. The browser continues working as if
 nothing changes. It even has a built-in process manager, try opening
 youtube.com and killing a flash player plugin.

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

 This is an example of process-based designs implementation which is
 what D2 aims at, and it is clearly a success.


 It's probably worth mentioning that IE has offered an option to make
 each window its own process for as long as I can remember.  That said,
 the idea of rethinking browsers in general is a good one, if "web as a
 platform" is ever going to make headway.


 Ehrm, I think that the Window as a Process feature is in Explorer only,
 not Internet Explorer.  I quickly checked my Internet Explorer and
 didn't find that feature (though I know it's there for just plain-old
 Explorer).  Explorer isn't a web browser AFAIK, so IE really hasn't been
 doing anything special along those lines.


 
 Huh... I could have sworn there was an IE setting for this.  Ah well.
 
 
 Sean


Nope, but you can control it somewhat: in IE6 (and IE7 too I think) if 
you open a new browser from an existing one (Open in New Window) it will 
use the same process. But if you run the iexplorer.exe executable it 
will launch a new process.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Developer, MSc. in CS/E graduate
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
Sep 19 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Manfred_Nowak" <svv1999 hotmail.com> writes:
Denis Koroskin wrote:


 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


On page 16 they mention "precise GC".

-manfred

-- 
If life is going to exist in this Universe, then the one thing it 
cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion. (Douglas Adams)
Sep 04 2008
parent reply Tomas Lindquist Olsen <tomas famolsen.dk> writes:
Manfred_Nowak wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:
 

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


 
 On page 16 they mention "precise GC".
 
 -manfred
 


Are you suggesting we should start talking about how this could be done in D ?

-Tomas
Sep 04 2008
next sibling parent Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:

 Manfred_Nowak wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:


 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


 On page 16 they mention "precise GC".

 -manfred


 
 Are you suggesting we should start talking about how this could be done 
 in D ?
 
 -Tomas


It would require compiler support.

It would require emitting pointer maps for each stack frame and each object.

It's relatively straightforward. If you align pointers on word 
boundaries, you only have to store one bit per word; else, one bit per 
byte; so this is not a terribly large overhead (no more than a couple 
bytes for a typical function, probably).

It wouldn't be terribly fast, but it probably wouldn't be an extreme 
slowdown either, most likely.
Sep 04 2008
prev sibling parent reply Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:

 Manfred_Nowak wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:


 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


 On page 16 they mention "precise GC".

 -manfred


 
 Are you suggesting we should start talking about how this could be done 
 in D ?
 
 -Tomas


A major benefit of a precise GC is that you can turn it into a moving 
GC. Without a precise GC, you might change some random sequences of 
bytes to something else because it looks like a pointer to something you 
moved; not so with a precise GC.
Sep 04 2008
parent reply Fawzi Mohamed <fmohamed mac.com> writes:
On 2008-09-05 03:06:24 +0200, Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> said:


 Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:

 Manfred_Nowak wrote:

 Denis Koroskin wrote:
 

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


 
 On page 16 they mention "precise GC".
 
 -manfred
 


 
 Are you suggesting we should start talking about how this could be done in D ?
 
 -Tomas


 
 A major benefit of a precise GC is that you can turn it into a moving 
 GC. Without a precise GC, you might change some random sequences of 
 bytes to something else because it looks like a pointer to something 
 you moved; not so with a precise GC.


well as long as you have unions, then you have to be *very* careful 
about not moving them.
In safe D this is not an issue.

Fawzi
Sep 05 2008
parent Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:

 On 2008-09-05 03:06:24 +0200, Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> said:

 A major benefit of a precise GC is that you can turn it into a moving 
 GC. Without a precise GC, you might change some random sequences of 
 bytes to something else because it looks like a pointer to something 
 you moved; not so with a precise GC.


 
 well as long as you have unions, then you have to be *very* careful 
 about not moving them.
 In safe D this is not an issue.
 
 Fawzi
 


Ach, bugger the unions.

Now you need two bits per word: one for whether it contains pointers and 
one for whether it pins anything it points to, assuming it's a pointer. 
Unions containing pointers (punions) would be pinning pointers, and you 
could probably use some sort of pragma to indicate that a pointer should 
pin whatever it points to.

In the presence of a punion, a garbage collector would be conservative. 
Otherwise it could be precise.
Sep 05 2008
prev sibling parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
"Denis Koroskin" wrote

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


Hey, this comic is really awesome for explaining things!  The author did a 
great job.  Any artists out there that can explain the D benefits this way? 
I think that might go a long way for newb's.

-Steve
Sep 04 2008
next sibling parent Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> writes:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 Hey, this comic is really awesome for explaining things!  The author did a 
 great job.  Any artists out there that can explain the D benefits this way? 
 I think that might go a long way for newb's.


That's certainly true! Though, they should've kept it a tad shorter. It 
was kind of getting boring at some point.
Sep 04 2008
prev sibling parent reply "Bill Baxter" <wbaxter gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
<schveiguy yahoo.com> wrote:

 "Denis Koroskin" wrote

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


 Hey, this comic is really awesome for explaining things!  The author did a
 great job.  Any artists out there that can explain the D benefits this way?
 I think that might go a long way for newb's.

 -Steve


I was reading that comic thinking man this guy *must* have really
studied those "understanding comics" books because he's using all the
techniques just like they're described in that book.

Turns out the comic was done by Scott McCloud, who *is* the
Understanding Comics books guy.

So looks like all we have to do is pay Scott McCloud large sums of
cash and he will make us a nice comic for D too!

--bb
Sep 04 2008
parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
Bill Baxter wrote:

 On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Steven Schveighoffer
 <schveiguy yahoo.com> wrote:

 "Denis Koroskin" wrote

 You can read the whole story at www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/


 Hey, this comic is really awesome for explaining things!  The author did a
 great job.  Any artists out there that can explain the D benefits this way?
 I think that might go a long way for newb's.

 -Steve


 
 I was reading that comic thinking man this guy *must* have really
 studied those "understanding comics" books because he's using all the
 techniques just like they're described in that book.
 
 Turns out the comic was done by Scott McCloud, who *is* the
 Understanding Comics books guy.
 
 So looks like all we have to do is pay Scott McCloud large sums of
 cash and he will make us a nice comic for D too!
 
 --bb


Let's have him do a comic explaining Walter why C-legacy is bad, and why 
Java style is (usually) good.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Developer, MSc. in CS/E graduate
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
Sep 19 2008