6 ms·

I'd argue a GC is an order of magnitude bigger compromise though. And that even before considering performance.

by tjoff 4y ago

pjmlp 4y ago
Only when disregarding that many languages with GC capabilities, also offer value types and features for manual memory management.
- tjoff 4y ago
  Don't really see the appeal for that, seems like it leads to more fragmentation and very few benefits.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    No two language syndrome.
    - tjoff 4y ago
      ?
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        Pure Julia vs Python + C.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
amelius 4y ago
Yes, so use Rust for all your tree-shaped programming problems. And a GC'd language for everything else. I know if you're holding a hammer it's difficult to not see everything as a nail ...
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Exactly, hence why Rust's killer use cases are scenarios where having a GC is a no go option.
- tjoff 4y ago
  Or, you use a non-GC language for any application where you care about memory (hint, vast majority of applications fall into this category). GC is imo the single biggest mistake in software engineering.
  - verdagon 4y ago
    In a lot of fields, it's more important to have a codebase that's easier to use and more flexible than a codebase that uses less memory. This is why people opt for GC and why it's such a big benefit.
    - tjoff 4y ago
      I'm not really talking about memory requirements. And I don't see how a GC would make any difference in terms of ease of use or flexibility of a codebase. It is a mindset about memory, but you have to have a mindset about memory anyway so it isn't exactly unique.
      - worik 4y ago
        It is important to have a code base that an inexperienced programmer can work on. Keeping track of memory is one of the hardest parts of programming in languages like C, a bit easier in C++ (thanks RAII) but still memory leaks are rampant. Rust improves in some aspects, but I do not think it is a language for inexperienced programmers. So where garbage collection pauses are tolerable, and real time performance not an issue, save the money and use garbage collection. I too hate garbage collectors, I want to be in control. But the business case is clear: garbage collected languages are a better choice in a lot, f not most, cases.
        4y ago

I'd argue a GC is an order of magnitude bigger compromise though. And that even before considering performance.

by tjoff 4y ago

I'd argue a GC is an order of magnitude bigger compromise though. And that even before considering performance.

Only when disregarding that many languages with GC capabilities, also offer value types and features for manual memory management.

tjoff 4y ago
Don't really see the appeal for that, seems like it leads to more fragmentation and very few benefits.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  No two language syndrome.
  - tjoff 4y ago
    ?
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      Pure Julia vs Python + C.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

amelius 4y ago

Yes, so use Rust for all your tree-shaped programming problems. And a GC'd language for everything else. I know if you're holding a hammer it's difficult to not see everything as a nail ...

pjmlp 4y ago
Exactly, hence why Rust's killer use cases are scenarios where having a GC is a no go option.
tjoff 4y ago
Or, you use a non-GC language for any application where you care about memory (hint, vast majority of applications fall into this category). GC is imo the single biggest mistake in software engineering.
- verdagon 4y ago
  In a lot of fields, it's more important to have a codebase that's easier to use and more flexible than a codebase that uses less memory. This is why people opt for GC and why it's such a big benefit.
  - tjoff 4y ago
    I'm not really talking about memory requirements. And I don't see how a GC would make any difference in terms of ease of use or flexibility of a codebase. It is a mindset about memory, but you have to have a mindset about memory anyway so it isn't exactly unique.
    - worik 4y ago
      It is important to have a code base that an inexperienced programmer can work on. Keeping track of memory is one of the hardest parts of programming in languages like C, a bit easier in C++ (thanks RAII) but still memory leaks are rampant. Rust improves in some aspects, but I do not think it is a language for inexperienced programmers. So where garbage collection pauses are tolerable, and real time performance not an issue, save the money and use garbage collection. I too hate garbage collectors, I want to be in control. But the business case is clear: garbage collected languages are a better choice in a lot, f not most, cases.
      - 4y ago