All: I owe an apology to the ChucK community for spreading incorrect information: having played around with Tom Lieber's excellent Timeout class, it's clear that ChucK DOES reclaim expired shreds. As compensation for my embarrassment, I'm relieved that my code will become a LOT simpler. - Rob
Rob,
Don't be embarrassed. As a result of this discussion I hunted down
and removed a number of gratuitous object instantiations and other
such memory-hogs and made my code a lot more memory efficient. Also I
was schooled in the ways of the ulimit and sysctl unix commands. No
complaints here.
-Mike
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Robert Poor
All:
I owe an apology to the ChucK community for spreading incorrect information: having played around with Tom Lieber's excellent Timeout class, it's clear that ChucK DOES reclaim expired shreds. As compensation for my embarrassment, I'm relieved that my code will become a LOT simpler.
- Rob
_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users
On 14 Jun 2009, at 23:34, Robert Poor wrote:
I owe an apology to the ChucK community for spreading incorrect information: having played around with Tom Lieber's excellent Timeout class, it's clear that ChucK DOES reclaim expired shreds.
It is really a documentation problem :-).
As compensation for my embarrassment, I'm relieved that my code will become a LOT simpler.
It is important to know, but your example still shows that 'chuck' may not clean up expire threads fast enough. So if one produces a lot of threads, one may still have to consider reusing them - this might be needed for conserving time, too. Hans
participants (3)
-
Hans Aberg -
mike clemow -
Robert Poor