News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Functional programming languages should be better at mutation than they are. Parent comment

Re:Functional programming languages should be better at muta... by o11c on Wednesday July 31, 2024 @12:22AM (#41116389)
For GC-based inner languages it's mandatory to mention that inter-language cycles are nasty. Life is much easier in a world of explicit ownership!

I curate a list of what kinds of ownership people actually want: https://gist.github.com/o11c/dee52f11428b3d70914c4ed5652d43f...

It's been 6 years since I first posted it publicly, and neither I nor anyone giving suggestions has ever actually found a use for GC.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Functional programming languages should be better at muta... by zarzavat on Wednesday July 31, 2024 @01:17AM (#41116570)
IME the utility of GC is not for structs but for closures. It’s very easy to cause cycles when freely using closures in non-GC languages.
[ Parent | on HN ]