From: lex@cc.gatech.edu   
      
   Kevin Willoughby  writes:   
   > A lot of research has been done on garbage collection. It is possible to   
   > limit the CPU time consumed in garbage collection, allowing a real time   
   > system (at the expense of perhaps requiring a bit more memory).   
      
   To be pedantic, RT garbage collectors cost *time*, not memory.  Also,   
   they often require a awkward parameters to be set regarding the ratio   
   of various activities such as reading, writing, allocating new memory,   
   and so on, and if you get these parameters wrong then the garbage   
   collector loses its timing guarantee.   
      
   But negatives aside, they can be much nicer than manual memory   
   management.  Yet, they get pooed by many computer people.   
      
   A valid reason might be that most real time software is very simple,   
   and would not benefit from a garbage collector.  That may well be   
   possible; I don't know.   
      
   A common reason voiced is that the CPU usage is too much.  But this is   
   bogus, IMO.  CPU efficiency is the "launch mass" for computer people.   
   Fast CPU's are extremely cheap compared to the cost of a single   
   programmer's salary, and thus economically you should splurge on the   
   CPU's.  The days are long gone when companies have *one* computer plus   
   a swarm of programmers hovering around it.   
      
      
      
   -Lex   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)