Aaron.nospam.Sloman@cs.bham.ac.uk (Aaron Sloman See text for reply address) writes:
> I don't know whether Allegro allows
> dynamic reallocation of parts of the address space to different
> types.
>
Actually, you've misunderstood my example. Allegro CL doesn't use a
caged address space; it uses a generational garbage collector. I was
talking about another implementation. I know of no current commercial
implementations that use caging.
> Of course, the slowness of GCs using caged heaps might simply have
> been poor design rather than an inherent feature of caging.
>
I think caging might become popular again with the rise of 64 bit CPU's.
Given such an address space you can forget about moving the cages.
> It does mean that only 30 bits are available for small integers and
> small decimals, though you can have 32 bit signed integers in
> vectors, as described in REF INTVEC, and also double-decimals and
> bigintegers.
>
Same in CL. A good compiler puts in a lot of effort in in deciding whether
or not integers and floats and the like can be unboxed.
--
Lieven Marchand <mal@bewoner.dma.be>
If there are aliens, they play Go. -- Lasker
|