3 ms·
But this is not how languages are designed and even how Go was designed, where three people had to agree on features, instead of making "engineering trade offs"
by zzzcpan 10y ago
But this is not how languages are designed and even how Go was designed, where three people had to agree on features, instead of making "engineering trade offs". And this was a decent decision for familiarity and making the language more approachable, even though it was all dogma. The reason is simple: languages follow the same rules as user interfaces in general and as in user interfaces first thing that comes to mind is usually a better choice, than something overthought by a non-professional in UX, because you have it engraved in your brain by your most often previous experience and therefore it's very likely that many people do too. And having multiple people to agree basically supercharges that.
But then you still have to follow the rules of the UX, consistency, flexibility, all that, and none of the languages I know of are serious about that. It's all just dogma everywhere, or "engineering trade offs" if you like. We don't have much dogma only when it comes to performance, since it's the only thing easily measurable.