|
|
|
|
|
by wredue
639 days ago
|
|
You’re making your programs orders of magnitude slower to the back of claims that have absolutely zero metric demonstration. >simplifies a lot of things Runtime immutability simplifies nothing. >avoids common problems related to concurrency While simultaneously creating new problems. Like fine, you cannot make an edit on an object out from under the rug of another thread… except that in most cases, you have now just made that old object into invalid state that is lingering around your program like a death trap and to get around this, you are forced in to some pretty terrible synchronization bullshit that just locking objects doesn’t suffer from. >Implementing CoW is not too difficult The single greatest predictor of defects for every single language ever is “lines of code”. Implementing CoW sounds straight forward, but actually, incorrect CoW is a common source of bugs and you are just hand waving that away. |
|
Orders of magnitude slower? Citation needed. I don't think I've ever encountered any performance problems caused by immutability in anything I've worked on. But as always, there are tradeoffs, and if there's a bottleneck then it can be addressed when identified.
> The single greatest predictor of defects for every single language ever is “lines of code”.
Did you hallucinate whatever you think you replied to? At no point did I mention LoC. I mentioned simplicity. Two very different things.