News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Rust and the Future of Systems Programming [video]. Parent comment

Re:Rust and the Future of Systems Programming [video] by worik on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @03:43PM (#12971307)
"C also doesn't provide latency guarantees, as the same pathological programs can exist in C as well."

But you have to code them. They are predictable, or you let them in by allowing data structures to grow indefinitely

With C you can make latency guarantees. You can write code that does not have such guarantees but it is your choice

With GC you are not in control so there are fewer choices. You will not be able to make guarantees.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rust and the Future of Systems Programming [video] by naasking on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @03:53PM (#12971405)
> With GC you are not in control so there are fewer choices. You will not be able to make guarantees.

Not true. Hard and soft realtime GCs with sub-microsecond latencies exist. Latency is a property of a runtime, not of manual vs. automatic storage reclamation.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rust and the Future of Systems Programming [video] by worik on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @05:36PM (#12972257)
That is a misunderstanding of latency.

"Very fast" is still latency.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rust and the Future of Systems Programming [video] by naasking on Thursday November 17, 2016 @12:43AM (#12974685)
"No latency" is a fiction. The only question of any relevance is how much latency is tolerable for a given domain. And describing latency in worst-case timings is standard, so I understand latency just fine thanks.
[ Parent | on HN ]