JavaScript:ActionMonkey problems: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* How will we use MMgc? There are at least 2 modes: incremental and non-incremental. Incremental is smoother. Non-incremental has the advantage that you don't have to go through all your source code and add DWB() everywhere. | * How will we use MMgc? There are at least 2 modes: incremental and non-incremental. Incremental is smoother. Non-incremental has the advantage that you don't have to go through all your source code and add DWB() everywhere. | ||
* Do we have classes that are sometimes used on stack and sometimes on heap? MMgc doesn't currently fully support that (e.g. DWB() on the stack looks like it will crash). | |||
* What objects will be in managed memory? At least all JavaScript objects and scopes and the DOM objects. | * What objects will be in managed memory? At least all JavaScript objects and scopes and the DOM objects. | ||
* And of course--what to do about threads? This is a large topic, XXX TODO expand on this. | |||
Revision as of 00:49, 21 June 2007
Things that need to be figured out before ActionMonkey is finished include:
- How will we use MMgc? There are at least 2 modes: incremental and non-incremental. Incremental is smoother. Non-incremental has the advantage that you don't have to go through all your source code and add DWB() everywhere.
- Do we have classes that are sometimes used on stack and sometimes on heap? MMgc doesn't currently fully support that (e.g. DWB() on the stack looks like it will crash).
- What objects will be in managed memory? At least all JavaScript objects and scopes and the DOM objects.
- And of course--what to do about threads? This is a large topic, XXX TODO expand on this.