On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 10:37:01 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
The question is though what should happen in D. If Vibe.d fibres are a single threaded system, then they are not suitable for the actor, dataflow, CSP implementation needed in D since that must sit on a kernel thread pool where each lightweight thread is animated by whichever work stealing kernel thread comes along. Erlang, Go, GPars, Quasar, etc. all
have different solutions to the problem of thread pools and task
switching since the context is all important.

Yes, I agree that the question is what should happen in D. But the claim was that D provides everything Go does and there is only a tiny scheduler that is missing. I don't think D benefits from these claims. Benchmark D thoroughly against Go before making claims or just give Go credit for being better in some areas.

If it was up to me then co-routines would be ripped out of the language. They are a cross cutting feature that makes significant optimizations and improvements difficult or impossible.

Reply via email to