Go reminded me: If you have "concurrency" but not shared-nothing concurrency, you're just one bad actor/thread/task/etc away from disaster.
-
-
Replying to @potsdamnhacker
@potsdamnhacker you can have safe shared memory ala Rust. The important part for safe concurrent programs is eliminating data races1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@potsdamnhacker I believe Rust's safe shared memory is actually shared-nothing - the value ownership is a kind of linear typing.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lenary
@Lenary@potsdamnhacker yeah, just needs a better type system2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bascule
@bascule@potsdamnhacker yes, I very much agree that Go would be safer with a better type system. As usable? That's questionable...2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lenary
@Lenary@potsdamnhacker Go’s type system is simpler but that’s a double edged sword. It does less for you3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.