4 ms·

>He said "hell, use Swift" -- which didn't imply that he's considering it the first or best recourse. I've got that but it was too late... the comment was alre

>He said "hell, use Swift" -- which didn't imply that he's considering it the first or best recourse. I've got that but it was too late... the comment was already posted. I've up-voted his response. The rest of your points are invalid. Development is not only about a http server(which I'm sure is subpar compared with Go). You will burry your time and energy in making basic things work. As developer that's great because you can use your experience on your "next" project but as a start-up you are very likely to fail. There may be some IBM developers that played around with the language but I'm sure IBM has no swift powered service in production. Swift is still a language in flux with many changes pending in the next 2 -3 versions. Big corporations don't really like to invest in unstable environments. Maybe in 3-4 years from now Swift will be able to compete with Go but today there is really no reason to use Swift over Go for a backend service. > Go was developed because some old C/UNIX hackers didn't much like C++/Java and wanted to do their own thing I must say it again: C++ is a horrible language. It may perform well and it may be widely spread but that doesn't change much as far as its design is concerned. C++ competes mostly on its reach not on its merits. Hopefully that will change as new platforms emerge(i.e Rust). > In fact Facebook itself used to transpile PHP to C++ and run that (through their HipHop project). Yeah, that's a pretty picture for what C++ is really good for. I rest my case. Edit: I would also say "experienced hackers" instead of "old hackers". The C++ or Swift hackers are not younger anyway.

unscaled 10y ago
C++ is horrible in many ways, but Go never really tried hard to replace it (although it claimed to do that in the beginning, before it was refocused as a language for backend and tools). The are many reasons for that, but most importantly, Go doesn't support deterministic memory management (like C++, Rust and Swift) and opts for GC instead, which makes life easier for at least 95% of its use cases, but not for some of the use cases C++ used to shine on. I think that the Plan 9 Googlers dislike of C++ (and in truth, Modern C and UNIX as well) is closer to be the real reason for creating Go. It really was never designed to be a proper system language.
coldtea 10y ago
>The rest of your points are invalid. Development is not only about a http server(which I'm sure is subpar compared with Go). You will burry your time and energy in making basic things work. The same could be said, and was said for Go compared to Java C#, etc just a few years ago. And it probably can still be said, as older languages have much more stable, richer ecosystems, support, tooling, and use bases. >I must say it again: C++ is a horrible language. It may perform well and it may be widely spread but that doesn't change much as far as its design is concerned. C++ competes mostly on its reach not on its merits. Hopefully that will change as new platforms emerge(i.e Rust). Well, it gets a lot of things right. Compatibility with C. Great performance. Enough abstractions to be usable. Enough batteries built-in compared to C. Great ecosystem and tooling, first class vendor support, etc. A language is not just its syntax -- not even just its semantics.
- themihai 10y ago
  >>The same could be said, and was said for Go compared to Java C#, etc just a few years ago. And it probably can still be said, as older languages have much more stable, richer ecosystems, support, tooling, and use bases. I don't say that you should never use C++. Sometimes it's a necessary evil but that doesn't make it a great/pleasant choice(at least for me). >> Great ecosystem and tooling I think it could be considered GREAT 20 years ago but now it is miserable compared with the new languages. For example it has no kind of distribution model(i.e package manager). Cross platform compiling is no fun... C++ parsing is no fun either so you could say that its syntax is quite important if you were to develop new tools.

unscaled 10y ago

C++ is horrible in many ways, but Go never really tried hard to replace it (although it claimed to do that in the beginning, before it was refocused as a language for backend and tools). The are many reasons for that, but most importantly, Go doesn't support deterministic memory management (like C++, Rust and Swift) and opts for GC instead, which makes life easier for at least 95% of its use cases, but not for some of the use cases C++ used to shine on. I think that the Plan 9 Googlers dislike of C++ (and in truth, Modern C and UNIX as well) is closer to be the real reason for creating Go. It really was never designed to be a proper system language.

coldtea 10y ago

>The rest of your points are invalid. Development is not only about a http server(which I'm sure is subpar compared with Go). You will burry your time and energy in making basic things work. The same could be said, and was said for Go compared to Java C#, etc just a few years ago. And it probably can still be said, as older languages have much more stable, richer ecosystems, support, tooling, and use bases. >I must say it again: C++ is a horrible language. It may perform well and it may be widely spread but that doesn't change much as far as its design is concerned. C++ competes mostly on its reach not on its merits. Hopefully that will change as new platforms emerge(i.e Rust). Well, it gets a lot of things right. Compatibility with C. Great performance. Enough abstractions to be usable. Enough batteries built-in compared to C. Great ecosystem and tooling, first class vendor support, etc. A language is not just its syntax -- not even just its semantics.

themihai 10y ago
>>The same could be said, and was said for Go compared to Java C#, etc just a few years ago. And it probably can still be said, as older languages have much more stable, richer ecosystems, support, tooling, and use bases. I don't say that you should never use C++. Sometimes it's a necessary evil but that doesn't make it a great/pleasant choice(at least for me). >> Great ecosystem and tooling I think it could be considered GREAT 20 years ago but now it is miserable compared with the new languages. For example it has no kind of distribution model(i.e package manager). Cross platform compiling is no fun... C++ parsing is no fun either so you could say that its syntax is quite important if you were to develop new tools.