News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by pknopf on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:29PM (#16569734)
Each module has to have it's own GC.

In my experience, it's been easier to integrate two languages that have GC (JavaScript and Go) than two languages where only one is GC'd (JavaScript and Rust).

What will the interop with Rust and JavaScript look like? How will pointers be managed?

Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by pcwalton on Monday March 12, 2018 @04:01PM (#16570999)
It's not at all easier to interoperate two separate GC'd languages unless you have one garbage collector to manage them both. Web Assembly does not provide the hooks necessary to integrate GC, and JavaScript does not provide critical features, such as finalizers, that are necessary to do things like break cross-language cycles. Absent that support, manual memory management of DOM objects is necessary, and Rust is going to have a much easier time of that than Go will.
Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by voidlogic on Monday March 12, 2018 @11:49PM (#16573780)
For specific needs I have occasionally made my Go struct constructors (NewFoobar() *Foobar) use malloc ported to Go + mmap to allocate memory and said structs have a .Close() method (think defer foobar.Close()). It worked fine... This is a fine solution/compromise, in 95+% of development solutions you don't want your devs wasting their time managing memory manually, and in the worse cases they will get it wrong.
Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by steveklabnik on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:36PM (#16569792)
> What will the interop with Rust and JavaScript look like? How will pointers be managed?

First, a disclaimer: all of this is extremely early days, and subject to change.

There's two questions hidden here: "what does the workflow look like?" and "how does this work technically?"

Currently, "what does the workflow look like" is this: https://github.com/ashleygwilliams/wasm-pack#%EF%B8%8F--how-...

"how does this work technically" is this: https://github.com/alexcrichton/wasm-bindgen

The former provides a nice workflow that's fundamentally built on the latter.

Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by the_mitsuhiko on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:31PM (#16569744)
Since JS and Go do not have the same GC you have the same issue there.
Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by pknopf on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:34PM (#16569768)
GC's have some kind of inherit reference counting which makes releasing pointers safe, in any direction. You can't do that with C/C++ without something like glib.
Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by the_mitsuhiko on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:38PM (#16569819)
Not entirely sure what you are referring to or how it relates to the issue here. If you have two separate heaps (what you have between go and JS) then they will be collected separately. As such you need to somehow keep objects on the other side alive. Worst: in Go the language does not guarantee that the GC won't compact (it doesn't do correctly though). As such you can't even pass pointers to JavaScript, you need to create handles.

I played around with both Go and Rust from Python and the garbage collection made things harder not easier. Now we write lots of Rust modules for Python and managing memory is pretty easy. We have Python wrapper objects that keep one pointer alive.

Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by kibwen on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:43PM (#16569868)
> GC's have some kind of inherit reference counting which makes releasing pointers safe, in any direction.

It sounds like you're mostly worried about memory leaks, but the primary concern with trying to get two separate GCs to play nicely isn't leaking memory, it's double-frees (both GCs trying to collect the same resource) and use-after-free (code in one language trying to use a resource that's been accidentally collected by the GC of the other language).

Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by majewsky on Monday March 12, 2018 @01:43PM (#16569870)
If you have reference counting across GC boundaries, you can easily create memory leaks because of reference cycles, e.g. GC 1 cannot release object 1 because it references object 2, and vice versa. (Unless you only allow refs to go one way.)
Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by masklinn on Monday March 12, 2018 @02:17PM (#16570183)
Great now I get flashbacks to 2005.

IE6 had exactly that issue, the DOM was implemented using COM which has its own GC (refcounting) separate from the regular JS runtime.

If you created a cycle between DOM and JS by, let's say, adding an event handler to a DOM node — thankfully that's something you'd never do when developing web pages & applications — you'd start leaking memory which would survive across page reloads.

There was actually a bit of software called Drip, it was just a webview wrapper (technically an MFC app with a browser COM component), you'd launch it, open your page, click the "blow memory" button and it'd reload the page over and over again listing elements which had survived between reloads.

Re:Rust's 2018 roadmap by pcwalton on Monday March 12, 2018 @04:03PM (#16571013)
No major JS implementation uses naive reference counting, because there's no way to break cycles. Cycle collection requires the ability to trace the heap globally. But the JS engine does not have any way to see inside a wasm heap.