4 ms·
I think there’s a good argument that async is decent for performance critical languages, e.g C++ and Rust, and for languages looking to model effects, e.g Haske
by tybit 5y ago
I think there’s a good argument that async is decent for performance critical languages, e.g C++ and Rust, and for languages looking to model effects, e.g Haskell and arguably Rust.
I don’t see a good reason for it in mainstream languages like Java, JavaScript and C#.
I think Java’s approach with Loom is going to be a big win over C# there, as someone that just wants to get stuff done and is a fan of both.
- merb 5y agoI'm not sure if Loom will be successful. It does not fit the ecosystem. Thus a lot of java async stuff needs a lot of rewriting, this can either disrupt the ecosystem or split it. at least on the library level.
- Matthias247 5y agoI actually feel it would be successful because it exactly fits the ecosystem. A lot of Java code is classical threaded code. E.g. the majority of Java servlet code, and older web frameworks. Those would all immediately benefit from Loom in terms of resource utilization and scalability. Of course Java also has some frameworks like Netty and things built on top of it - which won't benefit. But I feel like even though those are great from a performance point of view, they are actually more niche in the overall java world.