On Wednesday, 26 October 2022 at 10:53:50 UTC, German Diago wrote:
>On Wednesday, 26 October 2022 at 06:28:37 UTC, Arun wrote:
>On Wednesday, 26 October 2022 at 01:06:27 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>On 10/25/22 17:53, zjh wrote:
>I am saying the above with full understanding that there are programmers out there who were educated in C++ circles and are sure that garbage collectors are for inferior languages. That is a shortcoming of their education.
For short running tools and low volume stuff, yes, GC is good.
My practical experience running vibe.d service with GC in production: default GC is a bane. Default should've been @nogc.
I would like to hear your experience with Vibe.d. I would care about performance scaling. I have been genuinely interested in using it for years but I did not dare to jump into it. As opposed to Django.
But my intuition tells me that sooner or later Django backends for small things like what I do will be a resource hog compared to D? True that I can partition, do microservices, etc. but that complicates things. On the positive Python side, there is no compilation step and that helps a lot in many situations.
Is django really that much of a resource hog though? If stuff like Instagram can use it just fine, maybe we're just being overly pessimistic?
https://instagram-engineering.com/web-service-efficiency-at-instagram-with-python-4976d078e366