JEP proposed to target JDK 11: 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector (original) (raw)
Hendrik Schreiber hs at tagtraum.com
Thu Jan 18 10:21:43 UTC 2018
- Previous message: JEP proposed to target JDK 11: 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector
- Next message: JEP proposed to target JDK 11: 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Jan 18, 2018, at 11:15, Andrew Dinn <adinn at redhat.com> wrote:
On 18/01/18 10:10, Erik Österlund wrote: I do not feel too comfortable with this being a product flag regardless of the name. There is existing code that assumes that for example System.gc() will actually do something. Similar for assumptions that language features like finalizers and reference objects and queues will do anything at all. That makes me feel uncomfortable. Do you feel comfortable with exposing a product flag that breaks code relying on those features? Honestly, if we are at the point where we need to cater for those who pass in -XX:+UseNoGC and still expect "System.gc() will actually do something" the I believe all hope for civilization is a faint and distant pipe dream.
Indeed.
Also: “UseNoGC" is by far the better flag name than anything epsilon. If you’re absolutely in love with “epsilon”, make it an alias, but not the main name. Usability and accessibility beat fancy origin stories hands down, IMO.
-hendrik
- Previous message: JEP proposed to target JDK 11: 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector
- Next message: JEP proposed to target JDK 11: 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]