Synopse Open Source

Working with objects is pretty powerful, but requires to handle manually the created instances life time, via try .. finally blocks. Most of the time, the TSQLRecord life time would be very short: we allocate one instance on a local variable, then release it when it goes out of scope.

If we take again the TSQLBaby sample, we may write:

function NewMaleBaby(Client: TSQLRest; const Name,Address: RawUTF8): TID;
var Baby: TSQLBaby;   // store a record
begin
  Baby := TSQLBaby.Create;
  try
    Baby.Name := Name;
    Baby.Address := Address;
    Baby.BirthDate := Date;
    Baby.Sex := sMale;
    result := Client.Add(Baby);
  finally
    Baby.Free;
  end;
end;

To ease this pretty usual pattern, the framework offers some kind of automatic memory management at TSQLRecord level:

function NewMaleBaby(Client: TSQLRest; const Name,Address: RawUTF8): TID;
var Baby: TSQLBaby;   // store a record
begin
  TSQLBaby.AutoFree(Baby);  // no try..finally needed!
  Baby.Name := Name;
  Baby.Address := Address;
  Baby.BirthDate := Date;
  Baby.Sex := sMale;
  result := Client.Add(Baby);
end; // local Baby instance will be released here

I just wrote a small sample program, for benchmarking Mustache libraries: native SynMustache vs mustache.js running on SpiderMonkey 24...

And the winner is ...SynMustache, which is 10 times faster, uses almost no memory during process, and handles inlined {{>partials}} natively (whereas we have to handle them manually with mustache.js)!

Who says that Garbage Collection and immutable strings in modern JITted runtimes are faster than "native" Delphi applications?
Are you still preferring the "NextGen" roadmap?

I'm currently fighting against out of memory errors on an heavy-loaded Java server.

If only it had been implemented in Delphi and mORMot!
But at this time, the mORMot was still in its burrow.
Copy-On-Write and a good heap manager can do wonders of stability.

Here are some thoughts about Garbage Collector, and how to temper their limitations.
They may apply to both the JVM and the .Net runtime, by the way.

One quick Sunday post, from a comment I wrote in a blog article.

I'm always wondering why a lot of programmers tend to implicitly assume that "the shorter source code, the better".

It is true when it means that with proper code refactoring, making small objects with dedicated methods, the code of your methods will be smaller.
It is true when you do not like to write as a "Copy & Paste" coder, without searching to put common code in shared places.

But is it true at the language level?
I mean, is it just because your ARC or GC model allow you not to manage the object memory, that it is always better?

Just some ideas...

It is a strong-typed, compiled, cross-platform, and concurrent.
It features some nice high-level structures, like maps and strings, and still have very low-level access to the generated code: pointers are there, in a safe strong-typed implementation just like in pascal, and there is even a "goto", which sounds like an heresy to dogmatic coders, but does make sense to me, at least when you want to optimize code speed, in some rare cases.

It is created/pushed by Google, used internally by the company in their computer farms, and was designed by one of the original C creators.

Among all trolling subject in forums, you'll find out the great Garbage Collection theme.

Fashion languages rely on it. At the core of the .Net and Java framework, and all scripting languages (like JavaScript, Perl, Python or Ruby), you'll find a Garbage Collector. New developers, just released from schools, do learn about handling memory only in theory, and just can't understand how is memory allocated - we all have seen such rookies involved in Delphi code maintenance, leaking memory as much as they type. In fact, most of them did not understood how a computer works. I warned you this will be a trolling subject.

And, in Delphi, there is no such collector. We handle memory in several ways:

• Creating static variables - e.g. on the stack, inside a class or globally;
• Creating objects with class instances allocated on heap - in at least three ways: with a try..finally Free block, with a TComponent ownership model in the VCL, or by using an interface (which creates an hidden try..finally Free block);
• Creating reference-counted variables, i.e. string, array of, interface or variant kind of variables.

It is a bit complex, but it is also deadly powerful. You have several memory allocation models at hand, which can be very handy if you want to tune your performance and let program scale. Just like manual recycling at home will save the planet. Some programmers will tell you that it's a waste of cell brain, typing and time. Linux kernel gurus would not say so, I'm afraid.

Then came the big Apple company, which presented its new ARC model (introduced in Mac OS X 10.7 Lion) as a huge benefit for Objective-C in comparison with the Garbage Collection model. And let's face it: this ARC just sounds like the Delphi memory model.