"I prefer C++ to [GC language] for performance reasons"

> "I prefer C++ to [GC language] for performance reasons"
> *proceeds to use reference-counting pointers*

imagine being this cucked

Attached: HOjbEaOZ.jpg (227x222, 8K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wired.com/2006/12/indian-men-too-/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

ref counting has more predictable performance than mark and sweep GC, but people who complain about GC performance are always cargo cultists making greatly exaggerated claims who have never actually compared and tested performance

I want to a pajeet impregnate my white-as-milky wife.

Source of that image OP?
I'm having issues tracking it down.

The only place where not having a GC does make a difference is vidya, which goes to show which kinds of people obsess over GCs.

I program "vidya" and I can tell you that the performance impact of GC on that is exaggerated aswell

Dravidian Black BVLL here, I can help you dude.Does your wife have good physique.

That pajeet is OP he took the picture and he made that post 100% unironically.

GC is really annoying when you need to serve content in real-time. For instance if you need to do some manipulation of images before sending them to a server, having a GC can cause increasing latency.
Although it's possible to use low latency GCs, but ref counting is still more predictable.

The earliest I can find is dating back to 2015, but I can't find any definite origin

And your point is what? Ref counting is hardly a good system to represent a full blown gc. Hell you really think a fucking reference increment and deincrement is a big waste of computing resources?

I'm a C++ programmer but it's a valid point.
If you just do basic OO "enterprise" programming, a good implementation like OpenJDK will actually perform better than naive C++ / STL.

The strength of C++ is that you can define your own object behavior, allocators, constructors, operators, containers, etc. There is a reason why it's still the language of choice for high-performance applications.

>Ref counting is hardly a good system to represent a full blown gc
Yes it is

*cyclically references your data*
Heh, nuthin' personnel.....

Ya, no it isn't faggot. Literally any useful use of a gc system will have to deal with complex circular references. Having to think about weak refs to avoid circular refs is basically on the same level as worrying about calling free.

You use a weak reference or you don't make a circular reference
Reference counting is a good in-between if you don't want the unpredictability of mark and sweep but you don't want to go fully manual

>Having to think about weak refs to avoid circular refs is basically on the same level as worrying about calling free.
lol no it isn't

> Ref counting is hardly a good system to represent a full blown gc

Ref counting is not GC. It is the opposite of GC.

Okay but other languages are not as comfy so I may as well keep using something that is faster and more pleasurable.

Attached: Billy_Mays_Portrait_Cropped.jpg (1012x1387, 139K)

I never had to use shared_ptr, I only use unique_ptr. Maybe you should reconsider your design.

It's literally 2 machine code instructions - a conditional and an INC/DEC

i usually calculate maximum possible size for things, and just use static allocated storage for them. literally the fastest possible way

That's dumb. So notepad.exe always uses 4GB RAM or what?

Yeah, that's what GCs do.

nah, i forgot to write, but only do this when it's a sensible size. so cut off if it's over a megabyte or so, or in case of massively performance oriented things maybe a few hundred megabytes.

also, that would imply notepad can use 4 GB legitimately. you'd never want that. instead do some buffering
also, as long as you don't touch a piece of memory it is not backed even if it is allocated

2 more machine instructions than there should be.

shared_ptr is used very rarely unless the programmer is retarded. unique_ptr is the good stuff.

?

God, pajeets are so fucking ugly, just look at this creature, it got the worst thing from each race!

This

Untrue. There are plenty of real-time and/or embedded applications where GC leads to unpredictability of execution.

Probably won't happen, they have the smallest dicks ever that is too small even for condoms.
>wired.com/2006/12/indian-men-too-/

>There is a reason why it's still the language of choice for high-performance applications
*was

You have been visited by the Laura of not great, not terrible threads.

This thread is currently reading 32 replies (not great, not terrible).

Attached: Laura.jpg (1275x637, 107K)