[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Closures

Functional Object's Dylan is probably close to the "soft real-time"
requirement.  But more important is the GC architecture used by
FunO Dylan -- its architecture is meant to be very flexible with respect
to implementing widely varying policies.  This flexibility was well
tested in a number of different applications within Harlqn.  If anybody
had a serious proposal for using FunO Dylan for games, I am sure
that FunO would consider doing GC work to support them.

Mattias Engdegård wrote in message ...
>Bruce Hoult <bruce@hoult.org> writes:
>>What languages have you used previously?  You can do exactly the same
>>thing in many languages, including Lisp, Scheme, Perl, and I think,
>>recently, Python.
>
>No, not in Python (lexically surrounding scopes are accessible but
immutable
>for some reason). This is partly because of Python's odd mutation-inducing
>binding dogma, but a real annoyance nonetheless.
>
>ObDylan: Is there any Dylan implementation with a GC good enough for
>*soft* real-time use (soft as for real-time games, not nuclear power
>plant control)? I suspect any incremental or generational GC would do,
>but I'm not convinced that a stop-the-world GC (as most conservative
>ones seem to be) wouldn't disturb the smoothness of gameplay.
>
References: