3 ms·
This strikes me a somewhat narrow view of the world. Using a GC is an engineering trade-off like any other. Taking a dogmatic view on an engineering trade-off
by avianlyric 5y ago
This strikes me a somewhat narrow view of the world. Using a GC is an engineering trade-off like any other.
Taking a dogmatic view on an engineering trade-off isn't good engineering, and closes you off from exploring other, potentially better, ways of solving the problems you actually care about. (Which probably have nothing to do with the details of memory management)
Something tells me you wouldn't say "I prefer exactly no borrow checker [in Rust], and I don't think I'm giving anything up by skipping them".
- ncmncm 5y agoWrong on both counts.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- avianlyric 5y ago> Wrong on both counts. "Tradeoff" implies giving something up, and I just said I hadn't. And, I am happy to abjure the borrow checker; it doesn't solve any problem I have. Either. (Comment was edited while I was writing a response, original comment I responded to above) I'm glad to hear that you've taken the time to understand how GC work, and the trade-offs that languages make when use them. I would be curious to learn more about what you're research as has shown with regards to using a GC in your problem space. It's always interesting to learn about areas of engineering that unique requirements.