Lets talk about fibers

[Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 5 June 2015 at 18:25:26 UTC, Chris wrote:
> On Friday, 5 June 2015 at 17:28:39 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> wrote:
>> On Friday, 5 June 2015 at 14:51:05 UTC, Chris wrote:
>>> I agree, but I dare doubt that a slight performance edge will 
>>> make the difference. There are load of factors (knowledge 
>>> base, infrastructure, complacency, C++-Guruism, marketing 
>>> etc.) why D is an underdog.
>>
>> But everybody loves the underdog when it catches up to the 
>> pack and beats the pack on the finish line. ;^)
>>
>> I now follow Pony because of this self-provided benchmark:
>>
>> http://ponylang.org/benchmarks_all.pdf
>>
>> They are communicating a focus for a domain, a good 
>> understanding of their area, and it makes me want to give it a 
>> spin even at this early stage where I obviously can't actually 
>> use it.
>>
>> I am not saying Pony is good, but it makes a good case for 
>> itself IMO.
>>
>>> no sugar, thanks." I know, as usual I simplify things and 
>>> exaggerate! He he he. But programming languages are like 
>>> everything else, only because something is good doesn't mean 
>>> that people will buy it.
>>
>> Sure, but it is also important to make people take notice. 
>> People take notice of benchmark leaders. And too often 
>> benchmarks measure throughput while latency is just as 
>> important.
>>
>> End user don't notice peak throughput (which is measurable as 
>> a bleep on the cloud server instance-count logs), they notice 
>> reduced latency. So to me latency is the most important aspect 
>> of a web-service (+ programmer productivity).
>>
>> I don't find Go exciting, but they show concern for latency 
>> (concurrent GC etc). Communicating that concern is good, even 
>> before they reach whatever goals they have.
>>
>>> As regard compiler-based features, as soon as features are 
>>> compiler-based people will complain "Why is it built-in? That 
>>> should be handled by a library! I want more freedom!" I know 
>>> for sure.
>>
>> Heh, not if it is getting you an edge, but if it is a second 
>> citizen addition. Yes, then I agree.
>>
>> Cheers!
>
> Thanks for showing me Pony. Languages like Nim and Pony keep 
> popping up which shows a) how important native compilation is 
> and [...]

Which is why after all those years, the OpenJDK will eventually 
support AOT compilation to native code for Java 10 with some work 
being done in JEP 220[0], and .NET does AOT native code on 
Windows Phone 8 (MDIL), with static compilation with Visual C++ 
backend coming with .NET Native.

And Android also went native with the Dalvik re-write.

The best approach is anyway to have a JIT/AOT capable toolchain 
and use them accordingly to the deployment target.

[0]Which means Oracle finally accepted why almost all commercial 
JVM vendors do offer such a feature. I read somewhere that JIT 
only was a kind of Sun political issue.