SureshG

From JEP 444:

The scheduler does not currently implement time sharing for virtual threads. Time sharing is the forceful preemption of a thread that has consumed an allotted quantity of CPU time. While time sharing can be effective at reducing the latency of some tasks when there are a relatively small number of platform threads and CPU utilization is at 100%, it is not clear that time sharing would be as effective with a million virtual threads.

Also, in this scenario, i think the current scheduler (ForkJoin Pool) will use managed blocker to compensate those pinned carrier threads.

You know that the code compiled using future version of java won' work in older versions..rt? I would like to know if any other programming language does that kind of thing.

> t should be as fast and easy to use and

How did you conclude that it's not fast? They are creating native binaries just like Go or any other AOT languages with GCs. Graal native images are as fast or faster than Go. Also it contains a REPL, that's why bigger size. So for CLI tooling as a developer using pkl, you won't see any difference if it's written in java + kotlin or golang.

We are running small services with heap size under 100 MBs and is absolutely possible with new JVM versions. If you want ever smaller without JIT, native image is also an option. Moreover in most scenarios, JVM provide better peak performance. So here is a tradeoff

Harmonious with the platform (jvm) which is based on threads, better stack-traces, accurate profiling info and simpler programming model (without adding async/await/suspend keyword everywhere) etc are some of the advantages.