>>99
You do really think that for most applications, storage that lasts just for the dynamic extent of a procedure will be enough? Suddently, applications have to maintain no state?
However, many applications that have be coded with GC'd language (like C# or Java) are slow. I'm not sure if it's because they are not native code or because of GC?
I don't know for .NET, but the JVM is
slow because it has to load all the
bloat first, and the JIT has to warm up and find the hotspots in your program.
Some people claim that JIT should make the byte code as fast as native code, so that leaves the GC to be blamed.
A JIT
emits ``native code'', you damned moron. And the GC doesn't run perpetually, and surely not at the startup.
Or maybe it's because the "premature optimization is the root of all evil" claim that makes these software slow?
Explain why not assembly, if premature optimization is not evil.
Also, you keep saying ``GCed language'', but I don't see the word ``GC'' in Java's spec, or Lisp's, Scheme's, ....