[Gc] Why do replacement operator new/new use
GC_MALLOC_UNCOLLECTABLE() instead of GC_MALLOC()?
hans.boehm at hp.com
Thu Jun 4 11:12:54 PDT 2009
The general model for gc_cpp.h is that garbage collectable memory is used only when explicitly requested, e.g. by inheriting from gc. Thus by default ::new allocates uncollectable memory as before. It doesn't use the system-provided allocator, since we do want to scan such memory.
This is clearly not always the right model.
From: gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com [mailto:gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com] On Behalf Of Talbot, George
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 7:47 AM
To: gc at linux.hpl.hp.com
Subject: [Gc] Why do replacement operator new/new use GC_MALLOC_UNCOLLECTABLE() instead of GC_MALLOC()?
C++ and the collector question: Why do the replacements for operator new use GC_MALLOC_UNCOLLECTABLE instead of GC_MALLOC()?
George T. Talbot
gtalbot at locuspharma.com<mailto:gtalbot at locuspharma.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gc