4 ms·
> Maybe you can afford to wait for Project Valhalla to arrive and finally build the applications and libraries you really want to build Or just use one of many
by brabel 1y ago
> Maybe you can afford to wait for Project Valhalla to arrive and finally build the applications and libraries you really want to build
Or just use one of many languages that support generics over primitive types right now?! I get it, I also write Java but if some application would benefit greatly from some feature another language has, I don’t really think too much about it. Having a few languages under your belt is really good, and most companies these days know that and have at least a couple of “approved” languages. People normally can learn a new language fairly quickly. With AI now it’s easier than ever.
- clanky 1y agoIt's not really possible to switch to another language without giving up one or more of: - Free, high quality concurrent GC - Advanced JIT with best-in-class runtime optimization of dynamic dispatch and virtual methods - Depth of the Java ecosystem and tooling I've written some fairly large applications where I dropped in these primitive-specialized collections when needed, it really presented no issues and was quite a bit simpler than a leap to an entirely new language and runtime. They can be composed fairly easily into AoS style data structures. To be honest the bigger headache from the current lack of value types comes from not being able to work with more involved temporary objects without the JIT giving up on escape analysis and putting them on the heap, which requires putting hacky approximations of out params in local fields. I'm optimistic this is going to be one of the earlier optimizations delivered by Valhalla.
- adgjlsfhk1 1y agoC#?