3 ms·
I don't think that's ordinary code. In any language, if you don't use a thread safe container and mutate it from multiple threads you'll get problems. This isn'
by consteval 2y ago
I don't think that's ordinary code. In any language, if you don't use a thread safe container and mutate it from multiple threads you'll get problems. This isn't an issue of memory safety but rather thread safety. You have to check the documentation for thread safe operations or otherwise use a lock. This goes for C#, Java, Go, you name it - the one singular exception being Rust. But, even Rust does not fully get around it.
- kccqzy 2y agoYou missed the point. > In any language, if you don't use a thread safe container and mutate it from multiple threads you'll get problems. Yes I agree there will be problems but what kind of problems do you get? Can you potentially get a memory safety problem, or are you guaranteed that the problem is not a memory safety problem? The point is that thread safety problems in Go lead to memory safety problems. That's not the case in Java. You can crash the whole Go program by doing that, but you cannot crash the JVM by doing the same thing.
- yawaramin 2y agoCrashing the whole program is actually memory safety. Because then the program can't get into an undefined state where parts of the program have access to memory they shouldn't.