4 ms·
That's why you have TinyGo: https://tinygo.org/ https://tinygo.org/
by denysvitali 3y ago
That's why you have TinyGo: https://tinygo.org/ https://tinygo.org/
- withinboredom 3y agoThis looks like a really interesting project. Thanks for sharing it! I'm going to have to try this out with a couple of projects. Just a cursory experiment reveals that it's GC seems to be much better than Go's GC and I'm very curious as to why that is.
- dolmen 3y agohttps://tinygo.org/docs/reference/lang-support/#garbage-collection https://tinygo.org/docs/reference/lang-support/#garbage-coll...
- withinboredom 3y agoInteresting that it says it is slower. It may actually be slower, but tends to not suffer as much degradation as the Go's GC. In other words, on my test setup using Go, I get ~1k rps once I hit memory limits, but with tinygo I get 7k rps once I hit memory limits. So it might be "slower" but it looks like it may be more efficient as well.
- rob74 3y agoAlso good for WASM...
- sapiogram 3y agoTinyGo is not Go, it's more accurate to see it as a dialect rather than a separate Go implementation imo. Many packages (even the stdlib) don't compile under it, and as I understand it, certain language features involving runtime reflection are likely to never be supported.
- pjmlp 3y agoJust like what many people call C is not ISO C, and similarly many ISO C libraries don't compile with "C" compilers for the same environments as TinyGo.
- hamburglar 3y agoThe differences between TinyGo and Go are vast compared to “C vs ANSI C” though.
- pjmlp 3y agoDepends on which embedded toolchain we are talking about.