[gclist] Web hosts for the FAQ

[Mike Spertus]

> Boehm and Weiser's paper in conservative collection is another good 
> one

I agree that it's a good one, although I believe there are some copyright
issues affecting electronic distribution. Hans?

In general, I am a bit concerned about the emphasis of the FAQ. I don't think that
the lack of detailed technical information on GC algorithms is really what is holding
GC back. I think that the site should have a technical backbone but spend most
of its effort orienting people to a GC mindset (without being fluff) and then
have pointers to the GC paper repository, etc.

As an example, I wrote an entry in the comp.object FAQ on "What Does OO have to
do with GC," where I showed how GC increases encapsulation, improves implementation
hiding, copes with dynamic execution paths resulting from the event-driven
paradigm, etc. (An expanded version of this article was published in the February
Object magazine). I'll try to get permission to put this in the GC FAQ.

Similar questions could be"If managing memory is so hard, application-dependent and
subtle when I write my own C programs, how can a GC automatically do what is
so hard for me?" (A: Manual memory management is hard because it forces the
programmer to predict the future (i.e. run-time) when writing the code (i.e.
compile-time. GC avoids the difficult need to predict the future by operating
at run-time). "Does this run-time analysis make programs slower?", 
"What does Bjarne Stroustrup say about GC in C++?"
(A: "Optional garbage collection, I think, is the right approach for C++"). "What
are some commercial products that use GC?", etc.