4 ms·
Quite right. And there's nothing wrong with that! But it's good to know if the author's main issue with Crystal is that it <lacks important feature X> or if i
by Lazare 10y ago
Quite right. And there's nothing wrong with that!
But it's good to know if the author's main issue with Crystal is that it <lacks important feature X> or if it's that it's not written in Go, which is a barrier for him to contribute. Both are very valid reasons to start a new project, but it's good info to have. :)
- cies 10y ago> And there's nothing wrong with that! I was not implying a problem with that. I'll try to make that more clear by an edit.
- kodo 10y agoCrystal is written in crystal so everyone has an equal barrier to entry
- brightball 10y agoIn terms of Crystal vs Go, I've heard that Crystal is slightly faster but that Go is more portable and has much better concurrency? Is that not accurate?
- RX14 10y agoCurrently that's true, but we aim to have better concurrency than go at the point of 1.0. Crystal can probably also gain more architectures faster due to llvm. It's only about a week's worth of work (at most) to port Crystal to a posix target that has LLVM support.