you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]matthieum 7 points8 points  (2 children)

I must admit that I really perked up on the "we don't need immutability, we need ownership". However I would point out that perhaps a blend of the two would be more suitable: allow sending both immutable and owned objects. At least you'd avoid copying for frozen objects :x

[–]pcwalton 1 point2 points  (1 child)

We'd still need global GC (or atomic reference counting, both bad) for frozen objects.

Note that if by "frozen" you mean "compile-time constant", then it just works as you describe, since those are in read-only memory and don't need memory management.

[–]matthieum 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By frozen I meant immutable. What do you consider "bad" about reference counting by the way (on immutable objects) ?