3 ms·
If this follows the monomorphic approach described in Featherweight Go [1][2], they will at least avoid problems caused by type erasure and avoid too much runti
by mikelward 6y ago
If this follows the monomorphic approach described in Featherweight Go [1][2], they will at least avoid problems caused by type erasure and avoid too much runtime overhead.
1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11710 https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11710
2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23368453 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23368453
- jasonhansel 6y agoBut then you have compile time overhead (an issue Rust and C++ have faced). One of Go's design goals was to have very fast compile times, which might be in doubt if they take the monomorphization approach.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- entha_saava 6y agoIs rust's slow compile time because of poor LLVM IR generation or just because monomorphization? D has generics and compiles fast. I guess Nim compile times are okay, too..