4 ms·

Because you need a VM with GC on the server so it doesn't crash and can share memory between cores properly. On the client you can go lower since deploying new

by bullen 4y ago

Because you need a VM with GC on the server so it doesn't crash and can share memory between cores properly. On the client you can go lower since deploying new buggy code only affects some of the clients and not the entire server (unless you deploy completely untested patches). - Rust seg. faults. - Go has no VM - WASM has no GC.

bheadmaster 4y ago
How exactly are GC and VM crucial to "not crashing" and "sharing memory"? And what exactly do you mean by "not crashing"? Crashing is a broad term, and I assume you mean C++-style-crash-because-of-type-safety-errors. Go does not run on VM, yet is type safe. Rust can indeed cause segfaults, but that's only if you (ab)use the "unsafe" mechanism, which is explicitly labeled as not safe. As long as you stick to the safe Rust, segfaults are impossible. Could you explain your reasoning to me in a little more detail, please?
- bullen 4y ago
  "While I'm on the topic of concurrency I should mention my far too brief chat with Doug Lea. He commented that multi-threaded Java these days far outperforms C, due to the memory management and a garbage collector. If I recall correctly he said "only 12 times faster than C means you haven't started optimizing"." - Martin Fowler https://martinfowler.com/bliki/OOPSLA2005.html https://martinfowler.com/bliki/OOPSLA2005.html "Many lock-free structures offer atomic-free read paths, notably concurrent containers in garbage collected languages, such as ConcurrentHashMap in Java. Languages without garbage collection have fewer straightforward options, mostly because safe memory reclamation is a hard problem..." - Travis Downs https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/07/06/concurrency-costs.html https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/07/06/concurrency-co... "Inspired by the apparent success of Java's new memory model, many of the same people set out to define a similar memory model for C++, eventually adopted in C++11." - https://research.swtch.com/plmm https://research.swtch.com/plmm
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    All of those sources seem to compare Java to C and C++. You've mentioned more languages than C and C++. Furthermore, your third source even admits that it's possible to implement similar memory model in C++, which goes against your claims. Regardless, I wasn't asking for sources, I was asking for elaboration. What exactly does VM and GC have to do with crashing and memory sharing - in other words, how exactly does a lack of VM and GC imply crashing and inefficient memory sharing?

by bullen 4y ago

bheadmaster 4y ago

How exactly are GC and VM crucial to "not crashing" and "sharing memory"? And what exactly do you mean by "not crashing"? Crashing is a broad term, and I assume you mean C++-style-crash-because-of-type-safety-errors. Go does not run on VM, yet is type safe. Rust can indeed cause segfaults, but that's only if you (ab)use the "unsafe" mechanism, which is explicitly labeled as not safe. As long as you stick to the safe Rust, segfaults are impossible. Could you explain your reasoning to me in a little more detail, please?

bullen 4y ago
"While I'm on the topic of concurrency I should mention my far too brief chat with Doug Lea. He commented that multi-threaded Java these days far outperforms C, due to the memory management and a garbage collector. If I recall correctly he said "only 12 times faster than C means you haven't started optimizing"." - Martin Fowler https://martinfowler.com/bliki/OOPSLA2005.html https://martinfowler.com/bliki/OOPSLA2005.html "Many lock-free structures offer atomic-free read paths, notably concurrent containers in garbage collected languages, such as ConcurrentHashMap in Java. Languages without garbage collection have fewer straightforward options, mostly because safe memory reclamation is a hard problem..." - Travis Downs https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/07/06/concurrency-costs.html https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/07/06/concurrency-co... "Inspired by the apparent success of Java's new memory model, many of the same people set out to define a similar memory model for C++, eventually adopted in C++11." - https://research.swtch.com/plmm https://research.swtch.com/plmm
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  All of those sources seem to compare Java to C and C++. You've mentioned more languages than C and C++. Furthermore, your third source even admits that it's possible to implement similar memory model in C++, which goes against your claims. Regardless, I wasn't asking for sources, I was asking for elaboration. What exactly does VM and GC have to do with crashing and memory sharing - in other words, how exactly does a lack of VM and GC imply crashing and inefficient memory sharing?