Linked by kragil on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 20:26 UTC
Google "Native Client enables Chrome to run high-performance apps compiled from your C and C++ code. One of the main goals of Native Client is to be architecture-independent, so that all machines can run NaCl content. Today we're taking another step toward that goal: our Native Client SDK now supports ARM devices, from version 25 and onwards."
Thread beginning with comment 550163
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Laurence
by vivainio on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 21:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Laurence"
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

It's a managed language but it doesn't make assumptions (unlike some managed languages).


Go is not managed language, even if it's garbage collected. It compiles directly to native code that is executed on the CPU (i.e. no interim "bytecode" representation is used).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Laurence
by Hiev on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 21:52 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Laurence"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

True, and the consequence of being garbage collected is that it makes the size of the executable bigger, a minor issue compared with the benefits of a GC.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Laurence
by saso on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 23:24 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Laurence"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

And that it will make memory management of your code largely unpredictable. And introduce random latency bubbles as the incremental mark&sweep collector decides to run. And that you might start hitting into various OS-enforced resource allocation limits (number of open file descriptors, for example).
GC is good for some things (like large non-performance-critical CRM systems, ERP systems, web apps, etc.), but shit for cases where you need to make careful decisions about available resources and runtime (OS kernels, databases, HPC, etc.).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by Laurence
by Laurence on Wed 23rd Jan 2013 22:24 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Laurence"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Sorry yes. You're absolutely right.

Reply Parent Score: 2