4 ms·

Right from the article: > When I initially wrote down my reactions to Go, I didn’t know about another new systems language: Rust. But maybe I'm misreading (ho

Right from the article: > When I initially wrote down my reactions to Go, I didn’t know about another new systems language: Rust. But maybe I'm misreading (honestly). Still they end up getting compared an awfully lot, more than they're compared to closer languages. At any rate, yeah, I find it very weird that the languages are compared. There seems to be very little overlap in when you'd want to use them. If you aren't bound by C-linkage or zero-runtime/overhead requirements, then there are higher level, more flexible languages to use than Rust. If you do have those requirements, Go simply isn't an option. (This is a bit simplistic but is generally correct.) Edit: I see you're taking an overly literal interpretation of "only". You're right. Anyone can compare anything for any reason. I think the intent of my comment is clear enough.

burntsushi 11y ago
Your reasoning is not just a bit simplistic, it's overly reductive. Just because I'm not bound by C-linkage or zero-runtime/overheard requirements doesn't mean Rust isn't a good choice. Similarly, even if I do need to link to a C library, that doesn't mean Go is a bad choice. > There seems to be very little overlap in when you'd want to use them. If all you're going to do is consider each respective language's wheelhouses, then I might agree that there is little overlap (at least, currently). But in my experience, there are often plenty of other reasons in play that influence language choice. I once chose a language (not Rust/Go) purely because of how popular/accessible it was. There was no technical merit there, but because of that choice, the project has gotten very popular and used by a lot of people. At work, a few months ago, we had an internal debate over whether to use Rust or Go for a new project. There's plenty of overlap. Not every problem has a workable solution governed by uncompromisable requirements that uniquely identify a language, so one invariably winds up adopting other criteria for choosing a language. These criteria may not be uniquely technical; they may be social or even emotional. I contend that nothing I've said here is controversial. My goal is to encourage others to broaden their horizons; we don't need to put our blinders on and snub our noses at people that do things differently. (Which is absolutely how I perceived your comments in this thread.)
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  While I don't mean to snub anyone, it's sorta like C++ - most would not use it if there was a better option (C compat, little runtime/overhead). Go cannot (AFAIK) be used when you need C compat (i.e., I can't write a C-compatible plugin in it, whereas with Rust I can). I'd contend that "GC or not GC" is _probably_ a rather large requirement. Rust is nice enough that some may use it when they don't really need it. But fair enough, if my comment came off snubbish, my fault.

burntsushi 11y ago

Your reasoning is not just a bit simplistic, it's overly reductive. Just because I'm not bound by C-linkage or zero-runtime/overheard requirements doesn't mean Rust isn't a good choice. Similarly, even if I do need to link to a C library, that doesn't mean Go is a bad choice. > There seems to be very little overlap in when you'd want to use them. If all you're going to do is consider each respective language's wheelhouses, then I might agree that there is little overlap (at least, currently). But in my experience, there are often plenty of other reasons in play that influence language choice. I once chose a language (not Rust/Go) purely because of how popular/accessible it was. There was no technical merit there, but because of that choice, the project has gotten very popular and used by a lot of people. At work, a few months ago, we had an internal debate over whether to use Rust or Go for a new project. There's plenty of overlap. Not every problem has a workable solution governed by uncompromisable requirements that uniquely identify a language, so one invariably winds up adopting other criteria for choosing a language. These criteria may not be uniquely technical; they may be social or even emotional. I contend that nothing I've said here is controversial. My goal is to encourage others to broaden their horizons; we don't need to put our blinders on and snub our noses at people that do things differently. (Which is absolutely how I perceived your comments in this thread.)

MichaelGG 11y ago
While I don't mean to snub anyone, it's sorta like C++ - most would not use it if there was a better option (C compat, little runtime/overhead). Go cannot (AFAIK) be used when you need C compat (i.e., I can't write a C-compatible plugin in it, whereas with Rust I can). I'd contend that "GC or not GC" is _probably_ a rather large requirement. Rust is nice enough that some may use it when they don't really need it. But fair enough, if my comment came off snubbish, my fault.