7 ms·
> Functional programming style tends to generate lots and lots of objects which die very young. Well, there is a lot of Scala code out there doing exactly that
by soc88 14y ago
> Functional programming style tends to generate lots and lots of objects which die very young.
Well, there is a lot of Scala code out there doing exactly that.
HotSpot has no problems with short-lived objects in pretty much all its garbage collectors while Dalvik's GC is just a lot less sophisticated and mature.
So I mainly agree with you, but the proposition of
Language allows producing lots of short-lived objects
+ Dalvik sucks
------------
Programs in that language have to be slow
doesn't hold in my opinion, as seen in the differences between Scala and Clojure.
- lucian1900 14y agoClojure still generates a lot more garbage, especially during bootstrap. This can be seen easily with VisualVM on the desktop, comparing hello world in the two languages.
- loup-vaillant 14y ago> Well, there is a lot of Scala code out there doing exactly that. I talked about specific examples that I don't even know of. I don't know Scala enough to know whether non-destructive updates are the default. Are they? What about the core libraries? I agree your proposition in fixed width font does not hold. I was merely asserting this one: Program P produces lots of short-lived objects + Dalvik sucks (or is tuned for long lived-objects) ------------------------------------------------- Program P have to be slow