On Monday, 7 June 2021 at 23:04:12 UTC, Norm wrote:
On Saturday, 5 June 2021 at 08:58:47 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Friday, 4 June 2021 at 21:35:43 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
On Friday, 4 June 2021 at 19:56:06 UTC, sighoya wrote:
This uniformization sounds too good to be true. I think most
people think that, but it's simply not true. malloc/free is
incompatible to garbage collection.
This is true and even druntime has a malloc/free option for
the GC. However, its implementation is really bad. Also the
implementation of the current GC has a lot of room for
improvements. It is still not appropriate for many embedded
systems as it requires another layer that steals CPU time and
code memory.
Speaking of embedded,
https://learn.adafruit.com/welcome-to-circuitpython
https://blog.arduino.cc/2019/08/23/tinygo-on-arduino
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/makecode/resources
http://www.ulisp.com/
https://developer.android.com/training/wearables/principles
https://www.microej.com/product/vee/
Meanwhile kids, the future generation of developers, keeps
adopting the hardware and programming languages listed above,
completly oblivious there is a programming language where all
discussion threads turn into GC vs no-GC no matter what was
the original subject.
There is also https://micropython.org/
I just skipped MicroPython, because Circuit Python seems to have
more uptake even though it is based on it.
It would not be my choice of language for medical but uPython
is used in a small number of embedded medical devices and has
been ported to several flavours of STM32.
This is a space where D could make a difference, although
unfortunately the language has some dark corner cases and
friction that put some people off to the point where they don't
see any benefit moving to D.
Exactly, and the whole GC vs no-GC take the language nowhere in
that regard.
