December 08, 2019
On Sunday, 8 December 2019 at 12:57:27 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> Still for some, GC has the same effect as garlic for vampires, and hence Rust and now Verona.

But I think GC is possible in what they outlined for Verona.

If the basic idea is to only allow one thread to access a group of objects then GC would be possible. Scanning would not interfere with other code at all if they use entity-ids between object-groups. (Component based model).

We'll see.



December 08, 2019
On Sunday, 8 December 2019 at 12:57:27 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>
> I imagine that was indeed the case, if you look between the lines from Joe Duffy's presentations on Midori.
>
> https://www.infoq.com/presentations/csharp-systems-programming/
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVm938gMWl0
>
> At the end of his Rust keynote, he mentions that even after being showed how well it worked, Windows Dev team was quite sceptical of it.
>

You don't need to read between the lines for that, as he explained it explicitly. Their attempt with Rust was a long term success but the developers weren't particularly keen on Rust. The developers felt that they were battling the compiler and simple stuff fast was difficult.

Actually, programming C++ is really dirt simple if you stick normal object oriented class like programming. It's when you start to dig into templates and ugly libraries C++ starts to become difficult. For simple programming Rust is more difficult than C++ as there is a bigger design burden on the programmer. The programming constantly have to think about various corner cases that occur often. Just thinking about there are three types of closures for example (D has one). Rust is full of these special cases which is starting to become hard to remember and are experienced as annoying. It just deteriorates the programmer experience.

What Verona can do better is to clean up all these families of different special types and corner cases to relieve the pressure from the programmer.

December 09, 2019
On Sunday, 8 December 2019 at 22:50:39 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> On Sunday, 8 December 2019 at 12:57:27 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>
>> I imagine that was indeed the case, if you look between the lines from Joe Duffy's presentations on Midori.
>>
>> https://www.infoq.com/presentations/csharp-systems-programming/
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVm938gMWl0
>>
>> At the end of his Rust keynote, he mentions that even after being showed how well it worked, Windows Dev team was quite sceptical of it.
>>
>
> You don't need to read between the lines for that, as he explained it explicitly. Their attempt with Rust was a long term success but the developers weren't particularly keen on Rust. The developers felt that they were battling the compiler and simple stuff fast was difficult.
>
> Actually, programming C++ is really dirt simple if you stick normal object oriented class like programming. It's when you start to dig into templates and ugly libraries C++ starts to become difficult. For simple programming Rust is more difficult than C++ as there is a bigger design burden on the programmer. The programming constantly have to think about various corner cases that occur often. Just thinking about there are three types of closures for example (D has one). Rust is full of these special cases which is starting to become hard to remember and are experienced as annoying. It just deteriorates the programmer experience.
>
> What Verona can do better is to clean up all these families of different special types and corner cases to relieve the pressure from the programmer.

Rust?

Midori used System C# also known as M#, which has a tracing GC, with support for value types, low level allocation, basically similar to D capabilities.

Even though it failed to impress Windows team, at least we got some of those features in C# 7.x, 8 and a couple more might land on 9.

Oh and the .NET Native native experiment (to be merged into main .NET as per .NET 5 roadmap).

However, most of this stuff is far from what Midori was trying to achieve.

I already mentioned in multiple replies that MS is already using Rust in production.


1 2
Next ›   Last »