Ruby 2.6 - Hackdot

Re:Ruby 2.6 by buckysock on Monday December 24, 2018 @07:46PM (#18755137)

Thread support in interpreted languages isn’t that parallel to begin with.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 2.6 by jashmatthews on Monday December 24, 2018 @07:56PM (#18755181)

JRuby threads are fully parallel and in production use today. CRuby's GIL is an implementation choice rather a property of dynamic/interpreted languages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 2.6 by viraptor on Tuesday December 25, 2018 @08:00AM (#18757236)

Is it really a "choice" if the alternative is really hard to achieve in practice? It's like calling python's GIL a choice... with numerous projects trying to get rid of it in various ways and never really succeeding to do it while keeping the single threaded performance and the extensions API.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 2.6 by pjmlp on Tuesday December 25, 2018 @08:25AM (#18757309)

It is a choice to keep backwards compatibility with the C extensions API.

The GIL would be quite easy to replace otherwise.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 2.6 by jashmatthews on Wednesday December 26, 2018 @01:19AM (#18760914)

> It is a choice to keep backwards compatibility with the C extensions API.

IIUC for CRuby it's mostly about how to keep the VM simple. Koichi Sasada is working on an ownership based model like Erlang has, which sidesteps a bunch of theses issues.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 2.6 by buckysock on Tuesday December 25, 2018 @06:26AM (#18757012)

I’m wondering.. what is the effect of letting the JVM handle synchronization then ? Wouldn’t they still need to synchronize within JvM ?

[ Parent | on HN ]