3 ms·
Then you don't want Zig or Rust. Use a language with a GC. Exploratory programming is a lot more pleasant when you don't have to worry about calling free() at t
by notriddle 4y ago
Then you don't want Zig or Rust. Use a language with a GC. Exploratory programming is a lot more pleasant when you don't have to worry about calling free() at the right time. I've had success with PHP and Elixir for productive, exploratory programming, not just because of their GCs, but also because they both support REPL-driven development and hot code reloading.
- coldtea 4y ago>Then you don't want Zig or Rust. I might still want Zig just fine. E.g. because I know C well, and it's a better C. Or because of the ease of interfacing with C/native libs. And several other reasons.
- jhgb 4y ago> Then you don't want Zig or Rust. Use a language with a GC. Zig allows custom allocators pretty much everywhere, right? Would it be impossible to provide it with a GC-based allocator for increased convenience at the cost of a little performance for programs (or parts of programs) where convenience is preferred? Perhaps libgc could be an inspiration here.