3 ms·

"system programming" is not composed entirely of things where GC presents a non-trivial problem.

• jdright 9y ago
  But 100% > 50%.
  • abiox 9y ago
    i don't quite follow what you're trying to say.
    • jdright 9y ago
      Simple put: Go ISN'T a true systems programming language because it simple does not work for every and ALL type of systems. Yes, it may work with some type of systems, but this does not make it a systems language. If you don't want to accept this fact, then you have bigger problems or you reality is narrow. Maybe this can help you see through your bubble: https://github.com/CppCon/CppCon2017/blob/master/Presentations/When%20a%20Microsecond%20Is%20an%20Eternity/When%20a%20Microsecond%20Is%20an%20Eternity%20-%20Carl%20Cook%20-%20CppCon%202017.pdf https://github.com/CppCon/CppCon2017/blob/master/Presentatio...
      • SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
        Another way to say it: The set of systems programming tasks for which Rust can be used is a superset of that for which Go can be used. Go cannot be used for real time code, as it does not provide latency guarantees. Go cannot be used for many embedded (microcontroller) systems as the runtime is required. I've gotten Rust code to run on an ATSAMD21G18 Arm Cortex M0 (Adafruit Feather board). That board has 256K flash and 32K RAM. Go executables can't even fit in the program flash! Considering the sheer number of systems that have microcontrollers in them somewhere it would be very hard to call a language that doesn't support them a "systems" language. Maybe "applications language" would be more appropriate.
      • abiox 9y ago
        oh, i see. so you were pointlessly making a some kind of fallacy argument. no "true" systems programming language, indeed.
        • jdright 9y ago
          Seriously? Fallacy? That is really not wanting to understand things how they are. You should really go back to textbooks and try to understand hardware.