Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Personally, I think global's with constructors are kind of an anti pattern. I've noticed a high correlation between crappy app's and app's with a lot of pre main() code. Especially if some of your global's have threads: because then you potentially have threads running AFTER main exits... I've seen a number of apps with random crashes at shutdown because a thread that was started in a global was still running and since main returned globals were being cleaned up and the thread used something that had just been cleaned up.

This article seems to be targeted toward embedded programming, so global state isnt that big of a deal because you have complete control of the chip. It's quite common to not even have threads or an operating system at all.

This is a real problem; i’m not sure rooting all mutable state on the stack will help in this case without language-level metadata restricting frees, passing references, and dereferencing.

It seems like the rust answer of making it difficult to share mutable state is a solid answer—you explicitly manage concurrent state, rather than implicitly allowing sharing. In addition rust has some interesting run-once constraints you can add to closures that work well with global initialization. I’ll admit I haven’t seen enough rust to see it work well in action, but the pieces are there.

> some of your global's have threads

Creating threads in pre-main code is generally a code smell, rather than running pre-main code.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact