News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The State of Go: Where we are in February 2016. Parent comment

Re:The State of Go: Where we are in February 2016 by kasey_junk on Wednesday February 03, 2016 @01:35PM (#11028506)
I think you are missing my point. So I'll restate it. sync.Pool does not help with GC issues compared to the JVM because the JVM also has object pools, further those object pools are actually better for the low latency case because the language does not force them to make a choice between dynamic type checks and specific use abstractions.

[edit] As pcwalton points out. My whole argument is actually null and void due to type erasure...doh.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The State of Go: Where we are in February 2016 by pcwalton on Wednesday February 03, 2016 @01:40PM (#11028553)
To be fair, though, aren't generics on the JVM type-erased? So you're going to have a type assertion at the JIT level either way.
[ Parent | on HN ]