🇳🇱
@icedquinn Not sure I agree. The whole point of the GC not being explicit is to reduce human error, and it does a good job at that. Java performance compared to many other interpreted languages is exceptional (not so much .net).
You also do have the ability to "suggest" the invocation of garbage collection should you need to add some explicit control to speed things up. but it rarely makes much of a difference.
) so we could collect between game frames. the hoard of c# games doesn't scavenge time when its opportune and just framedrops at random ass times.there's a lot of deployments where its actually fine for the GC to stop the world, it just needs to tell the load balancer about it ahead of time
@icedquinn @freemo I remember reading that Erlang has a funny way of handling that. It has a stop-the-world GC, except it's per process and Erlang is optimised to handle things with a crapton of small processes with small heaps. So your program cleans up tiny patches of garbage all the time, each process fast enough to be imperceptible.
I always wanted to make something in Erlang but never had a good project idea that fits it. Elixir also sounds interesting but again, wtf do I use it for, I'm not about to start implementing an nth Pleroma.
@Amikke
Java has several GC options that wont stop the world and ones that are super low latency as well as ones that are time constant (takes the same time to freeup a 100 TB heap as it does a 1KB heap)..
It is quite extrodinary how performant the Java GC is, out of all the memory managed languages it is probably the most efficient, if you know how to use it.
@icedquinn