4 ms·
No, Go is more simple, in terms of syntax among other things. The threading model in Go is very attractive as well, please refer to this article: https://swtch.
by akacase 11y ago
No, Go is more simple, in terms of syntax among other things. The threading model in Go is very attractive as well, please refer to this article: https://swtch.com/~rsc/thread/ https://swtch.com/~rsc/thread/
- pcwalton 11y ago> The threading model in Go is very attractive as well, please refer to this article: https://swtch.com/~rsc/thread/ https://swtch.com/~rsc/thread/ That's a nice overview of CSP. It's not a selling point for Go over Rust. Rust threads are in fact a purer implementation of CSP than Go goroutines are.
- akacase 11y agoDidn't know that, thanks.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- davidpelaez 11y agoGo offers thread as channels directly expressed in the language Syntax, not as a semantic construct on top of them. That is of course attractive for it's simplicity, but Rust offer a lower level alternative. I don't have much experience with Rust, but maybe a clever macro could be use to express in a higher level the type of things you'd use go channels for. Going back to my proposed question, maybe people can prefer golang for this syntactic benefit but I don't think that addresses the larger set of differences that usually separate them.
- davidpelaez 11y agoThanks for the link. It was a great read to understand in more detail what go channels really are from a theoretical perspective and how that could actually be matched within Rust.