3 ms·
pron, isn't it simpler to just allocate everything on heap, than reallocating coroutine stacks? Or is allocating on heap significantly less performant than mana
by avodonosov 7y ago
pron, isn't it simpler to just allocate everything on heap, than reallocating coroutine stacks? Or is allocating on heap significantly less performant than managing coroutine stacks (stack need to be copied, while heap allocated object can stay the same).
Also, is there any timeline or estimate when Loom will be released with official JDK?
- kasperni 7y ago> Also, is there any timeline or estimate when Loom will be released with official JDK? From another place in this thread: As OpenJDK has switched to time-based releases, we no longer plan releases based on features. When a feature is ready, it is merged into the mainline and released in the following release. We never commit to a timeline, but I would say that the probability for fibers to land in one of the two releases next year as quite high. Of course, we release projects gradually, and it's possible that some planned fiber features will not land in the first release, or that the performance in the first release will later be improved etc. However, early access Loom binaries (with API still very much in flux) are expected in a month or so, with the intention of gathering feedback on the API. The decision on when fibers are ready to be merged will greatly depend on that feedback.
- pron 7y agoIn the current Loom implementation, continuation stacks are allocated on the heap; they can grow and shrink as ArrayLists do -- the object stays the same, but the backing array needs to be reallocated.
- avodonosov 7y agoI meant every stack frame to be a separate heap-allocated object.