3 ms·
And while we're in a world where Microsoft is saying "give it up with the whole value / reference type thing" (the value/reference type is an implementation det
by Locke1689 12y ago
And while we're in a world where Microsoft is saying "give it up with the whole value / reference type thing" (the value/reference type is an implementation detail)
No. First, they are semantically different, but second -- it's an implementation detail that provides better performance when used correctly. So, exactly what the parent was describing.
This is not to say that the CLR couldn't also optimize better, but personally I'm just voting for Project N.
- personZ 12y agoIt's an implementation detail that may provide better performance, but often provides no measurable difference at all (yes there is a profound semantic difference, and such is the foundation for the mechanism in the first place, but that hasn't been the context of this discussion). The parent was contrasting it against a JVM that does both better garbage collection, and actual escape analysis, so the comparison borders on absurd, and it is a statement made with zero context.
- Locke1689 12y agoI can tell you that in Roslyn it is a very important component of our optimization strategy. System.Collections.Immutable.ImmutableArray is an obvious example. As an extremely high performance managed application that competes directly with native code, it seems to be quite a good proxy for similar applications, including Minecraft.