On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:22:17AM +0900, Rick DeNatale wrote:
> I fear that a pluggable GC would only let you play around with pretty
> poorly performing GC alternatives.

I think I agree with your logic, though not necessarily your wording.
While a pluggable GC might not support some of the more interesting
alternatives, it would allow GC's that support moderate improvement over
the existing implementation.  Moreover, it might be enough to whet some
programmers' appetites to dive further into Ruby's internals than the
pluggable system supports.

The first hit is free, as they say, no? :)

Paul