23-Sep-2014 03:11, Andrei Alexandrescu пишет:
On 9/22/14, 12:34 PM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
22-Sep-2014 01:45, Ola Fosheim Grostad пишет:
On Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 17:52:42 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
to use non-atomic ref-counting and have far less cache pollution (the
set of fibers to switch over is consistent).
Caches are not a big deal when you wait for io.
Go also check fiber
stack size... But maybe Go should not be considered a target.
??? Just reserve more space. Even Go dropped segmented stack.
What Go has to do with this discussion at all BTW?
Because that is what you are competing with in the webspace.
E-hm Go is hardly the top dog in the web space. Java and JVM crowd like
(Scala etc.) are apparently very sexy (and performant) in the web space.
They try to sell it as if it was all the rage though.
IMO Go is hardly an interesting opponent to compete against. In pretty
much any use case I see Go is somewhere down to 4-th+ place to look at.
I agree. It does have legs however. We should learn a few things from
it, such as green threads, dependency management, networking libraries.
Well in short term that would mean..
green threads --> better support for fibers (see std.concurrency pull by
Sean)
dependency management --> package dub with dmd releases, use it to build
e.g.g Phobos? ;)
networking libraries -> there are plenty of good inspirational libraries
out there in different languages. vibe.d is cool, but we ought to
explore more and propagate stuff to std.net.*
Also Go shows that good quality tooling makes a lot of a difference. And
of course the main lesson is that templates are good to have :o).
Agreed.
Andrei
--
Dmitry Olshansky
