4 ms·
The tl;dr that I got when I read these a few months ago was that C# relies on too much FFI which makes implementing green threads hard and on top of that would
by vips7L 3y ago
The tl;dr that I got when I read these a few months ago was that C# relies on too much FFI which makes implementing green threads hard and on top of that would require a huge effort to rewrite a lot of stuff to fit the green thread model. Java and Go don’t have these challenges since Go shipped with a huge standard library and Java’s ecosystem is all written in Java since it never had good ffi until recently.
- neonsunset 3y agoSurely you're not claiming that .NET's standard library is not extensive and not written in C#. If you do, consider giving .NET a try and reading the linked content if you're interested - it might sway your opinion towards more positive outlook :)
- vips7L 3y ago> Surely you're not claiming that .NET's standard library is not extensive and not written in C#. I’m claiming that MSFT seems to care really about P/Invoke and FFI performance and it was one of the leading reasons for them not to choose green threads. So there has to be something in .NET or C# or win forms or whatever that is influencing the decision. I’m also claiming that this isn’t a concern for Java. 99.9% of the time you don’t go over FFI and it’s what lead the OpenJdk team to choose virtual threads. > If you do, consider giving .NET a try I’d love to, but dealing with async/await is a pain :)
- neonsunset 3y agoYou’ve never used it, so how can you know?
- vips7L 3y agoHow do you know I've never used it? Do you have a crystal ball?