3 ms·

I continue to fail to see your argument: First you claim that any language can be shoehorned into any usage, and then (last paragraph) you yourself show why tha

by fnl 9y ago

I continue to fail to see your argument: First you claim that any language can be shoehorned into any usage, and then (last paragraph) you yourself show why that isn't quite true. Plus, as said, Go's language "facilities" are a long shot from Java/Scala/C#'s, while having GC can be prohibitive in other areas (C++, Rust, embedded systems, real-time transaction processing), and some areas (e.g. space exploration) even need the ability to change the runtime code on the fly.

fauigerzigerk 9y ago
>First you claim that any language can be shoehorned into any usage I did not claim that at all. What I dispute is that the set of tasks for which both Go and Java/.NET are suitable is so small that it makes no sense to compare them. People often have a choice of using Go, Java, Scala, C#, etc, for the same task and that is why a comparison makes perfect sense.
- fnl 9y ago
  As I've explained here extensively, I don't think that Go is replacing any of the more fancy languages like Scala, Clojure, D, ... And as for C++, that's in a different domain. Finally, Java & C# are entrenched and Go has no decisively better advantage that would make it worth giving up those code bases (like Java was over C++' resource management). I do agree that Go has made the life of legions of PHP and Node.JS developers easier. And it is nicer to do web development in Go rather than C and Python. However, claiming that Go "eats everybody's lunch" is rather outlandish.
  - fauigerzigerk 9y ago
    >However, claiming that Go "eats everybody's lunch" is rather outlandish. I didn't say it was. I said comparing Go to Java or C# is useful because these languages are suitable for many of the same tasks. What you are making of this pretty uncontroversial statement is mind boggling.
    - fnl 9y ago
      Just as in the other thread, the only unfounded claim is that Go provides similar facilities as Java or C# at language level. Go was explicitly designed to avoid all that, after all. So comparing those three at language level only surfaces a long list of things you can do in Java, and an even longer one for C#, but not in Go.
      - fauigerzigerk 9y ago
        That makes absolutely no sense. Languages with very different features can be used for solving very similar problems and hence a comparison can be useful.
        fnl 9y ago
        The keyword here being "different". I don't think that the utter absence of features is terribly interesting. To me, that's just a matter of taste.

by fnl 9y ago

fauigerzigerk 9y ago

>First you claim that any language can be shoehorned into any usage I did not claim that at all. What I dispute is that the set of tasks for which both Go and Java/.NET are suitable is so small that it makes no sense to compare them. People often have a choice of using Go, Java, Scala, C#, etc, for the same task and that is why a comparison makes perfect sense.

fnl 9y ago
As I've explained here extensively, I don't think that Go is replacing any of the more fancy languages like Scala, Clojure, D, ... And as for C++, that's in a different domain. Finally, Java & C# are entrenched and Go has no decisively better advantage that would make it worth giving up those code bases (like Java was over C++' resource management). I do agree that Go has made the life of legions of PHP and Node.JS developers easier. And it is nicer to do web development in Go rather than C and Python. However, claiming that Go "eats everybody's lunch" is rather outlandish.
- fauigerzigerk 9y ago
  >However, claiming that Go "eats everybody's lunch" is rather outlandish. I didn't say it was. I said comparing Go to Java or C# is useful because these languages are suitable for many of the same tasks. What you are making of this pretty uncontroversial statement is mind boggling.
  - fnl 9y ago
    Just as in the other thread, the only unfounded claim is that Go provides similar facilities as Java or C# at language level. Go was explicitly designed to avoid all that, after all. So comparing those three at language level only surfaces a long list of things you can do in Java, and an even longer one for C#, but not in Go.
    - fauigerzigerk 9y ago
      That makes absolutely no sense. Languages with very different features can be used for solving very similar problems and hence a comparison can be useful.
      - fnl 9y ago
        The keyword here being "different". I don't think that the utter absence of features is terribly interesting. To me, that's just a matter of taste.