opencog-dev team mailing list archive

[Cassio Pennachin <cassio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

> What you describe would be a simple programming error
> on the part of whoever wrote the such mind-agents. It would
> be quite easy to fix.

Whether it's a programming error or not depends on the concurrency  
model we adopt.

> The problem that I'm concerned about is at a different level.
> Say that some process, after completing its work, is deleting
> a bunch of stuff. For example, say the NLP subsystem is
> done processing a bunch of sentences, and so these need
> to be deleted. No other process will access these sentences,
> so this should not be a problem.

Why won't attention allocation, background inference and other  
processes access those sentences?

> > But, you'd wipe out most of the performance benefits of C++ because
> > that would mean that people can't control memory usage by themselves.
>
> But that's not the problem! The locking problem is a *much*
> worse performance hit than GC could ever be, or so it seems
> to me -- the issue is not the performance of the GC, but
> the performance of multi-threading.

I have the same intuition.

Cassio