5 ms·
> multi-object concurrency I'm not familiar with this term, and it doesn't seem googleable. Can you give a definition? > The Erlang GC cannot be compared with
by mietek 13y ago
> multi-object concurrency
I'm not familiar with this term, and it doesn't seem googleable. Can you give a definition?
> The Erlang GC cannot be compared with Java's GC.
And yet, by saying "the only really-good GCs are found in the JVM", you compare all GCs.
- pron 13y agomulti-object concurrency Sorry. I meant multi-object transactions. Slip of the finger. And let me qualify: good GCs that are relevant to solving that problem GCs are essential for, namely concurrent data structures. Erlang doesn't have a GC that's relevant (I really like Erlang, BTW).
- mietek 13y agoThen surely you know support for transactions is built as a layer on top of ETS? I actually don't like Erlang as a whole, because it lacks a static type system, but that's besides the point. I reject characterising the BEAM VM's GC as not-really-good, especially in concurrency context. I believe the immutable, shared-nothing, message-passing model is a superior solution to the data problem than the threads-and-locks model. Actual memory sharing is an optimization which can be applied by the runtime system, as it's done for binaries in Erlang.