News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Functional programming languages should be better at muta... by andrepd on Wednesday July 31, 2024 @10:58AM (#41119791)
GC does force you into a memory layout for your objects that negates any advantage in the allocation routines proper.
Re:Functional programming languages should be better at muta... by quotemstr on Wednesday July 31, 2024 @12:49PM (#41120854)
No it doesn't. GCs need to be able to traverse objects. They don't impose object layout constraints.
Re:Functional programming languages should be better at muta... by tsimionescu on Thursday August 01, 2024 @01:41AM (#41126461)
I'm guessing you're referring to the fact that the most popular GC languages allocate almost every object on the heap, even when used as a field of another object. This is by no means a constraint of the GC, it is a separate design choice.

And in fact C# has always supported "value objects", which do get allocated in-place, Java is adding the same support probably in the next release, and Go actually defaults to it.

Re:Functional programming languages should be better at muta... by pjmlp on Thursday August 01, 2024 @08:58AM (#41128659)
Only if speaking about languages without system programing capabilities alongside their GC features.