> Ignores that Java had escape analysis years before Go happened Yeah, because I don't think that matters. I do assume that Java has most of the state of the a

> Ignores that Java had escape analysis years before Go happened Yeah, because I don't think that matters. I do assume that Java has most of the state of the art GC work applied to it. Partly because it produces more garbage because of language decisions. > And it doesn't need an advanced GC, so Green Tea rewrite was wasted work? One of the problems with GC is that it means forever working to come up with the "sufficiently smart GC". It was Java's original sin wrt memory, and why it did not mind producing so much garbage. But in my opinion Java has illustrated very well that there's no end to pursuit of the perfect GC. And being runtime behavior I find it a worse one-way door choice than Rust trying to find the perfect borrow checker. But no, it's not wasted work. Just like with Java improving GC and allowing programmers to produce less garbage (I shall resist making a pun here) will save many dollars of electricity, battery life, and human waiting time. > However your blog clearly points out where you stand in regards to Java, so maybe some unwillingness to learn the ecosystem was part of it. You could say that. You could also say that I won't aim to become a connoisseur of the many flavors of poop that Java is working on. The point of my is that it's clear from history and evidence that Java is poop, so finding the best tasting poop is not really interesting, nor in going in to too many details about the nutmeg aroma and polished shine a particular ball of next gen GC delivers. Life's too short to continue tasting what is already known to be poop.