News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Measuring GC latencies in Haskell, OCaml, Racket. Parent comment

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)

[ Parent | on HN ]
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.
[ Parent | on HN ]
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.
[ Parent | on HN ]
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.
[ Parent | on HN ]