samsara VS steel

> IME it's the other way around, per-object individual lifetimes is a rare special case

It depends on your application domain. But in most cases where objects have "individual lifetimes" you can still use reference counting, which has lower latency and memory overhead than tracing GC and interacts well with manual memory management. Tracing GC can then be "plugged in" for very specific cases, preferably using a high performance concurrent implementation much like https://github.com/chc4/samsara (for Rust) or https://github.com/pebal/sgcl (for C++).

> Just for example: "it needs a GC" could be the heart of such an argument

Rust can actually support high-performance concurrent GC, see https://github.com/chc4/samsara for an experimental implementation. But unlike other languages it gives you the option of not using it.

The compiler support you need is quite limited. Here's an implementation of cycle collection in Rust: https://github.com/chc4/samsara It's made possible because Rust can tell apart read-only and read-write references (except for interior mutable objects, but these are known to the compiler and references to them can be treated as read-write). This avoids a global stop-the-world for the entire program.

Cascading deletes are rare in practice, and if anything they are inherent to deterministic deletion, which is often a desirable property. When they're possible, one can often use arena allocation to avoid the issue altogether, since arenas are managed as a single object.

There are concurrent GC implementations for Rust, e.g. Samsara https://redvice.org/2023/samsara-garbage-collector/ https://github.com/chc4/samsara that avoid blocking, except to a minimal extent in rare cases of contention. That fits pretty well with the pattern of "doing a bit of GC every frame".

There are a number of efforts along these lines, the most interesting is probably Samsara https://github.com/chc4/samsara https://redvice.org/2023/samsara-garbage-collector/ which implements a concurrent, thread-safe GC with no global "stop the world" phase.

Nice blog post! I also wrote a concurrent reference counted cycle collector in Rust (https://github.com/chc4/samsara) though never published it to crates.io. It's neat to see the different choices that people made implementing similar goals, and dumpster works pretty differently from how I did it. I hit the same problems wrt concurrent mutation of the graph when trying to count in-degree of nodes, or adding references during a collection - I didn't even think of doing generational references and just have a RwLock...

I absolutely don't mind the plugin system being a Scheme. It's a plugin for a text editor, and Steel(https://github.com/mattwparas/steel) seems to be a lot less of a maintenance burden than WASM plugins(besides that I find the WASM tooling to be extremely complex).

But besides all that, Helix learned be that I don't need fancy plugins or endless finicking with config files and toolchains. Using a combination of other tools, like yazi and lazygit, helps me not only inside my editor but outside of it as well. And Kakoune does this even better. In that regard it has been a real eye-opener and refreshing. The downside is, it's hard to go back to other editors!

Basically the differences are in the concepts you'll use to write code. Lisps themselves are very different from each other, but just like the languages you're used to, lisps have standard libraries that can be called, and those building blocks can be used to build applications or whatever else. In this case specifically, Steel provides the facility to call Rust functions within a Steel program: https://github.com/mattwparas/steel.

So, although I haven't used Steel, it looks like the advantage you'd get from using it is the opportunity to take advantage of features it provides like transducers and contracts, which are feature common to other Lisps as well.

So, just like choosing any other language, it boils down to a series of tradeoffs.

I've been adding my language steel as the plugin language for helix. There is a lot of discussion around what the plugin system will look like for helix and I figured I'd give it a shot since steel was designed originally for embedding. So far its working pretty well, it turns helix into emacs (without the nearly 50 years of development, so not quite as good). I'm reasonably confident the changes won't be accepted upstream (my language is a scheme but I am the only developer at the moment), but even if not it is a really fun experiment. Hoping that it can be used as a basis for whatever plugin system they eventually land on. An example of what configuration would look like:

Working on automatic doc generation for steel. I've been procrastinating building this out for a while - some of the easy cases are really easy, while the hard cases are definitely not easy.

I'm working on steel, an embedded scheme like programming language. I have lofty goals of eventually adding a JIT and making it viable as a standalone language, but for now its just about as fast as python, and makes for fairly pleasant embedded scripting. Recently added modules and dylibs, and am working on getting documentation into a better place so that adding more libraries becomes easier. I've written a functioning slack bot in it, which is pretty fun, eventually want to make a discord bot as well out of it just to stress test it a bit