4 ms·
>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 langua
by 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 agoJust 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 agoThat 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 agoThe 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.