What are the downsides of using immutable libraries?

What are the downsides of using immutable libraries?

While immutable libraries offer benefits like easier debugging and thread safety, they can also have downsides. For instance, they may lead to increased memory usage since new objects are created instead of modifying existing ones. This can impact performance, especially in memory-constrained environments.

Can you give an example of a situation where this would be a problem?

Sure! In a real-time application, like a game or a financial trading platform, the overhead of creating new objects frequently can lead to performance bottlenecks. If the application needs to handle a high volume of transactions or updates quickly, the memory and processing costs of immutability can slow it down.

Are there any specific libraries that are known for these downsides?

Yes, libraries like Immutable.js or Immer can be great for managing state immutably, but they can also introduce performance issues if not used carefully. For example, if you frequently update large data structures, the overhead of copying can become significant.

What are some strategies to mitigate these downsides?

To mitigate these downsides, you can use techniques like structural sharing, where you only copy parts of the data that change, or consider using mutable structures in performance-critical sections of your code while keeping immutability for the rest.