3 ms·
It's interesting to see that GC is "marketed" to Java developers as some important topic that they all should put effort into meanwhile in .NET world GC is bas
by tester756 4y ago
It's interesting to see that GC is "marketed" to Java developers as some important topic that they all should put effort into
meanwhile in .NET world GC is basically outsourced to
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/author/maoni/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/author/maoni/ and team and their famous gc.cpp
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dotnet/runtime/main/src/coreclr/gc/gc.cpp https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dotnet/runtime/main/src/co...
and nobody touches anything but one knob iirc
- moonchild 4y agoAnd .net gc sucks in comparison to java.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- thfuran 4y agoIsn't a more performant GC one of Azul's longest standing selling points for their jvm? It makes sense to me that they'd want to talk about gc.
- adgjlsfhk1 4y agoA lot of the difference is that .NET has actual value types so is less dependent on GC performance. Java came from a brief period when a lot of people thought GCs were magic and so they made their GC problems 10x worse than any other remotely fast language.
- pjmlp 4y agoActually many didn't, except for Smalltalk and SELF, all other languages around that time with automatic memory management did have support for value types. It was a huge mistake to ignore them.
- vips7L 4y agoNowadays with modern Java collectors you really don’t touch any knobs outside of -Xmx (max heap) or if you have special constraints, choosing a different gc implementation like -XX:+UseZGC
- pjmlp 4y ago.NET GCs have plenty of knobs to turn as well, and since it allows C++ level of memory management, knowing when to use value types and native heap allocations is also part of those knobs.