Re: GC, exit-to-system

[franz!fizzy!jkf@kim.berkeley.edu]

>> I think this would just encourage people to write non-portable
>> code.  Calling the GC from a program may make it work better on
>> one implementation, while making it work not at all, or extremely
>> poorly, on another.


  As you know, many implementations enable the user to explicitly invoke a
gc.  Are you saying that we would be better off if each implementation
chose a different name for this function as that would discourage it's
use in portable programs?  This would certainly be a novel idea in
portable language design.   [and a poor one, in my opinion].
  In my experience, the gc function is typically used before running
benchmarks (and benchmarks seem to be the code that most people are 
porting between implementations at this time.)  It is extremely
unlikely that anyone would put a call to gc in their 'portable
program'.


- john foderaro
  Franz Inc.