4 ms·
Nobody said anything about obsessing. When you write code you need to care about your allocations, whether you have a GC or not. When you write code without a
by enneff 12y ago
Nobody said anything about obsessing.
When you write code you need to care about your allocations, whether you have a GC or not.
When you write code without a GC you need to be mindful of freeing memory. With a GC you do not.
So the GC relieves part of the burden of memory management, and that part is often the hardest part (particularly in concurrent systems).
- heinrich5991 12y agoThis is not neccessarily true, e. g. in Rust you have code without GC, but the compiler makes sure that everything is freed.
- dualogy 12y agoIf that is true, what's the trade-off? There are no silver-bullets so if their approach didn't involve some potential "deal-breakers" Go team (or the ecosystem) would probably have offered a Go clone of it. Would be curious what they're doing there in Rustland..
- dead10ck 12y agoI've only just started learning Rust, but from what I understand, the trade-off is that the type system in Rust is much more complicated, and thus harder to learn. Pointers have a concept of "ownership" and "borrowing", which can be more difficult to reason about, whereas in Go, you don't have to think about it as much--pointers are just pointers. It also makes the Rust compiler more complicated, which mean slow compile times. One of the main design goals in Go was blazing fast compile times.
- pcwalton 12y agoRust compile times are not due to the borrow checker. They are primarily due to optimization.