我问这个问题,首先不是因为垃圾收集的优点。我问这个问题的主要原因是我知道Bjarne Stroustrup说过c++在某个时间点上会有一个垃圾收集器。

话虽如此,为什么还没有加入呢?c++已经有了一些垃圾收集器。这是那种“说起来容易做起来难”的事情吗?或者还有其他原因没有添加它(并且不会在c++ 11中添加)?

交叉链接:

c++的垃圾收集器

澄清一下,我理解c++最初创建时没有垃圾收集器的原因。我想知道为什么不能添加收集器。


当前回答

原始C语言背后的一个基本原则是,内存是由一系列字节组成的,代码只需要关心这些字节在被使用的确切时刻意味着什么。现代C语言允许编译器施加额外的限制,但C语言包括——c++保留了——将指针分解为字节序列,将包含相同值的任何字节序列组装为指针,然后使用该指针访问先前的对象。

While that ability can be useful--or even indispensable--in some kinds of applications, a language that includes that ability will be very limited in its ability to support any kind of useful and reliable garbage collection. If a compiler doesn't know everything that has been done with the bits that made up a pointer, it will have no way of knowing whether information sufficient to reconstruct the pointer might exist somewhere in the universe. Since it would be possible for that information to be stored in ways that the computer wouldn't be able to access even if it knew about them (e.g. the bytes making up the pointer might have been shown on the screen long enough for someone to write them down on a piece of paper), it may be literally impossible for a computer to know whether a pointer could possibly be used in the future.

An interesting quirk of many garbage-collected frameworks is that an object reference not defined by the bit patterns contained therein, but by the relationship between the bits held in the object reference and other information held elsewhere. In C and C++, if the bit pattern stored in a pointer identifies an object, that bit pattern will identify that object until the object is explicitly destroyed. In a typical GC system, an object may be represented by a bit pattern 0x1234ABCD at one moment in time, but the next GC cycle might replace all references to 0x1234ABCD with references to 0x4321BABE, whereupon the object would be represented by the latter pattern. Even if one were to display the bit pattern associated with an object reference and then later read it back from the keyboard, there would be no expectation that the same bit pattern would be usable to identify the same object (or any object).

其他回答

要回答关于c++的大多数“为什么”问题,请阅读c++的设计与进化

强制垃圾收集实际上是一个低级到高级的范式转换。

If you look at the way strings are handled in a language with garbage collection, you will find they ONLY allow high level string manipulation functions and do not allow binary access to the strings. Simply put, all string functions first check the pointers to see where the string is, even if you are only drawing out a byte. So if you are doing a loop that processes each byte in a string in a language with garbage collection, it must compute the base location plus offset for each iteration, because it cannot know when the string has moved. Then you have to think about heaps, stacks, threads, etc etc.

简短的回答: 我们不知道如何高效地(在很少的时间和空间开销下)并且始终(在所有可能的情况下)正确地进行垃圾收集。

长一点的回答: 就像C一样,c++是一种系统语言;这意味着当您编写系统代码时,例如操作系统时,将使用它。换句话说,c++就像C一样,以尽可能好的性能作为主要目标。该语言标准不会增加任何可能阻碍性能目标的特性。

这暂停了这个问题:为什么垃圾收集会影响性能?主要原因是,当涉及到实现时,我们(计算机科学家)不知道如何在所有情况下以最小的开销进行垃圾收集。因此,c++编译器和运行时系统不可能一直有效地执行垃圾收集。另一方面,c++程序员应该了解他的设计/实现,他是决定如何最好地进行垃圾收集的最佳人选。

最后,如果控制(硬件、细节等)和性能(时间、空间、电源等)不是主要的限制,那么c++就不是合适的工具。其他语言可能会更好,并提供更多[隐藏的]运行时管理,以及必要的开销。

什么类型?它应该针对嵌入式洗衣机控制器、手机、工作站或超级计算机进行优化吗? 它应该优先考虑gui响应还是服务器加载? 它应该使用大量内存还是大量CPU?

C/c++被用于太多不同的环境。 我怀疑像增强智能指针这样的东西对大多数用户来说就足够了

编辑:自动垃圾收集器并不是一个性能问题(你总是可以购买更多的服务器),而是一个可预测的性能问题。 不知道GC什么时候会起作用就像雇佣一个嗜睡症的飞行员,大多数时候他们是很棒的-但当你真的需要响应的时候!

当我们比较c++和Java时,我们看到c++在设计时并没有考虑到隐式垃圾收集,而Java则是。

在C风格中使用任意指针这样的东西不仅不利于gc实现,而且还会破坏大量c++遗留代码的向后兼容性。

除此之外,c++是一种旨在作为独立可执行文件运行的语言,而不是具有复杂的运行时环境。

总之: 是的,在c++中添加垃圾收集是可能的,但是为了连续性,最好不要这样做。