The more I write code in other languages where I think hard about ownership ("does this method ultimately grab the object and throw a ref onto some long-lived data structure somewhere? Then it owns it, so I better clone it") the more robust my code in other languages generally gets. Same with mutation. Generally better to make a copy of something and then mess with it and throw it away than to try to mutate-then-unmutate or something like that, even though it might in principle be nanoseconds faster. Eliminate loads of spooky-action-a-distance bugs where things are getting mutated in one spot and used in another spot, when there should have been a copy in there somewhere.
> Eliminate loads of spooky-action-a-distance bugs
This line of thinking so sickens me. Many things are not easy when done right. That is no excuse to avoid understanding how to do them right. Sure, making endless copies is easier. But this is why machines now need 16GB of ram and four cores to run the calculator.
> But this is why machines now need 16GB of ram and four cores to run the calculator.
This has more to do with the fact that the web stack has become the de-facto app development platform, and thus we inherit the bloat and optimization oversights of that platform.
You're not going to make a 16GB calculator just because you personally prefer copies over shared ownership in a language that gives you the tools to avoid bloat in a myriad of ways.
