(un)popular opinion: Yes, is great, but most applications are totally fine with a GC allocation model.

The langauge is optimized for more system-critical applications than most of its users are working in.

A literal fork of rust that introduces a good GC would kind of hit a sweet spot for a lot of applications.

Algebraic data types, typeclasses (aka traits), functional programming at the fingertips, strict evaluation.

Kind of an for the next decades.

· · Web · 3 · 3 · 6

@holger Rust has solved the memory management in such an elegant way that I don't understand what you would gain from introducing a garbage collector.

@holger Hm...interesting idea, but I'm not quite convinced. Even if it wasn't for performance reasons that #Rust has no GC, it's unique ownership model makes it very clear where *resources in general* are allocated and freed. Think of resources not only memory related, but also:
- file handles
- database connections
- locks

All of these resources are automatically handled (e.g. closed, freed etc), when it goes out of scope.

So Rust's complex rules are there for a reason. A GC would not change that, IMO.

Sign in to participate in the conversation – a Fediverse instance for & by the Chaos community