So what do you see as the advantage in going the clojure-metal path? Is it that RPython is such a pain to debug that it ends up not being worth it in the end? Is the tradeoff essentially being able to do things exactly how you want in LLVM versus having to put up with warts that might not quite fit in PyPy? Or is there something the clojure-metal path will make easier than going with RPython? (Also didn't I see in the clojure-py blog once that you overcame the lack of threading by launching separate processes? Is there a reason that wouldn't work in the real world?)
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:15:29 PM UTC+8, tbc++ wrote: > > No, you're not missing something. In the past I've turned down the idea of > using RPython due to the lack of threading support. But in the past year > major, major headway has been made (as you mentioned) so perhaps RPython > isn't as crazy of an idea after all. > > As far as a GC goes, yes, RPython can use one of many JITs, with a > simple command-line switch, the RPython translator can create binaries that > use reference counting, Boehm GCs or a custom mark-and-sweep generational > (compacting?) GC. The only downside is that IIRC the more complex GCs are > not yet thread-safe. But once again, major work is being done there. > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
