Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by monsieurbanana on Monday December 05, 2016 @12:03PM
(#13106908)
Am I misreading something? The first half of your comment seems to suggest that no lisp language could work without a CG, while the second half suggest there're some lisp languages that do.
Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by agentgt on Monday December 05, 2016 @12:22PM
(#13107104)
Because I don't know how modern Lisps can do it (I believe there was hardware like lisp machines made specifically for Lisp that would deal or help with memory allocation/reuse as well as some code generation).
I honestly was curious if the OP had some insight that I did not. I realize re-reading the comment it sounds snide but I didn't want to assume the OP's knowledge.
For all I knew Racket could have some ability to avoid GC.
Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by ronjouch on Monday December 05, 2016 @11:35AM
(#13106610)
> "I'm curious how did you expect Racket to work without a GC or any Lisp like language for that matter or did you just assume because of video game usage?"
Just because of video game usage and my perception of Carmack as a performance freak who wouldn't compromise on performance. (Sloppy reasoning, I know! Thus, my questions on where GC makes sense in games)
Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by agentgt on Monday December 05, 2016 @12:48PM
(#13107432)
I actually was curious and not trying to be snide. For example I wasn't sure if Carmack or whoever might be using Racket for code generation (ie multi-stage programming) which in theory would avoid GC. I wasn't sure how he was using Racket.
Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by ronjouch on Monday December 05, 2016 @01:10PM
(#13107668)
No problem, your comment was clear and I didn't perceive it as snide, at all. Thanks for your carefulness in the discussion.
Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by bojo on Monday December 05, 2016 @06:44PM
(#13110973)
It should be noted that he used Racket to teach his son game programming. He mentioned in his QuakeCon 2013 talk that he was enthusiastic about FP concepts, but is too entrenched with C++ to make a change.
Re:Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket
by nickpsecurity on Monday December 05, 2016 @12:20PM
(#13107087)
I'm curious how did you expect Racket to work without a GC or any Lisp like language for that matter or did you just assume because of video game usage?
> - And regarding Haskell and OCaml, which I only vaguely know about, I had never asked myself how they handle memory. Which makes me ask: are there non-GCed functional programming languages? Does it make sense? (Especially given the kinds of deep complex data structures produced by immutability.)
Rust and C++ depending on your definition of FP. I believe there are some old ML languages as well (and even some old lisps).