low-latency GC

[Bruce Carneal]

On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 16:42:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad 
wrote:
> On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 14:44:25 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> And while on the subject of low level programming in JVM or 
>> .NET.
>>
>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2020/12/net-5-runtime-improvements/
>
> Didnt say anything about low level, only simd intrinsics, which 
> isnt really low level?
>
> It also stated "When it came to something that is pure CPU raw 
> computation doing nothing but number crunching, in general, you 
> can still eke out better performance if you really focus on 
> "pedal to the metal" with your C/C++ code."

So you must make the familiar "ease-of-programming" vs "x% of 
performance" choice, where 'x' is presumably much smaller than 
earlier.

>
> So it is more of a Go contender, and Go is not a systems level 
> language... Apples and oranges.
>

D is good for systems level work but that's not all.  I use it 
for projects where, in the past, I'd have split the work between 
two languages (Python and C/C++).  I much prefer working with a 
single language that spans the problem space.

If there is a way to extend D's reach with zero or a near-zero 
complexity increase as seen by the programmer, I believe we 
should (as/when resources allow of course).