Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ukma!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!abvax!iccgcc!klimas
From: klimas@astro.pc.ab.com
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: code blocks & mem. mgmt. It's always something!
Message-ID: <173.2690762d@astro.pc.ab.com>
Date: 3 Jul 90 15:40:45 GMT
References: <12448@june.cs.washington.edu>
Lines: 12

> Syntax and parsing issues are relatively unimportant compared
> to these implementation problems. I still maintain that closures
> are a powerful and useful language feature and think they
> should stay on the "wish list". Of course, I also believe that
> garbage collection is well-worth the 10% overhead that a good
> incremental garbage collector consumes. Programmers' time
> and program correctness are far more  important than a
> program than runs a mere 10% faster.
	Good heavens, you go up to a modern Smalltalk user and
	he'll be bitching about the need to further reduce the
	present 2%-4% garbage collection overhead they're 
	experiencing! <GRIN>