News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Garbage Collection by pjmlp on Sunday December 01, 2019 @04:37AM (#21674698)
So efficient that Swift's RC implementation loses against all major tracing GC implementations.

https://github.com/ixy-languages/ixy-languages

Re:Garbage Collection by jmull on Sunday December 01, 2019 @08:09AM (#21675303)
That project doesn’t compare GC implementations, so it’s probably not that useful here.

Also, the Swift implementation is a bit questionable if performance is a goal. That is, why not try to remove the memory management from the inner loop? Probably the first thing to try is value types instead of reference types, which are more generally preferred anyway.

Re:Garbage Collection by pjmlp on Sunday December 01, 2019 @08:12AM (#21675321)
Sure it does, memory management impacts the performance of the task being achieved, writing an high-speed network driver.
Re:Garbage Collection by jmull on Sunday December 01, 2019 @08:40AM (#21675425)
By that measure, every project is a good measure of GC performance. Is that really a good argument?

I believe all general purpose languages let the code allocate memory and therefore will let you allocate memory in a way inefficient to your task.

Re:Garbage Collection by pjmlp on Sunday December 01, 2019 @09:04AM (#21675524)
The argument is that to eventually write Swift code whose performance matches the competition, one needs to work around ARC's implementation.

Hence why there is so much emphasis on value driven programming alongside protocols at WWDC talks.

Re:Garbage Collection by ridiculous_fish on Sunday December 01, 2019 @01:51PM (#21677108)
My claim was about efficient COW collections and the FFI. The point of COW collections is enabling a simpler programming model.