News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Toward Go 2. Parent comment

Re:Toward Go 2 by masklinn on Thursday July 13, 2017 @02:40PM (#14763949)
> Except they seem to focus only on Java, .NET and C++

C# isn't mentioned in any of the previous proposals, only Java, C++ and C.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Toward Go 2 by _old_dude_ on Thursday July 13, 2017 @05:53PM (#14765613)
C# does generics specialization at runtime, hard to do if you have no JIT :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Toward Go 2 by davidp on Thursday July 13, 2017 @07:07PM (#14766067)
Thanks for the tip, you made me go google some things! [0]

Do you need a full-on JIT, or just a runtime? [1]

[0]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-g...

[1]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-g...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Toward Go 2 by AlphaSite on Thursday July 13, 2017 @10:28PM (#14766979)
As I understand it it’s JIT in name only, doing the compilation on first run and then never again.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Toward Go 2 by pjmlp on Friday July 14, 2017 @02:04AM (#14767870)
That is also a JIT, dynamic compilation doesn't require recompiling the code all the time.

The AS/400 uses a kernel level JIT, binaries are only JITted at installation time or explicitly via the command line.

The Lisp environments also only used JIT once.

Some implementations of Oberon would use bytecode instead of native code and JIT on module load.

There are many other examples.

[ Parent | on HN ]