4 ms·

In that case it sounds like you have a bone to pick with Rob Pike over Go. I suppose you can find him on Twitter if you want to settle your feud. I'd suggest to

In that case it sounds like you have a bone to pick with Rob Pike over Go. I suppose you can find him on Twitter if you want to settle your feud. I'd suggest to not bother when I have him on tape contradicting you. I did read Joe's blog, years ago. Your takeaway there also leaves you with a bone to pick with Microsoft, if it's just politics then you should be able to find someone in management at Microsoft to set straight. It'd be a real shame if there were no performance issues and it was shutdown due to politics alone.

pjmlp 9y ago
It doesn't matter what Rob Pike says regarding Go and systems programming, because Google, the company that employs him, has decided Go makes sense to write system components of Fucshia in Go. That is a fact, easily validated in Fuchsia's repository. According to you, Rob Pike should call management and let them know it is not a good idea to use Go for writing Fuchsia's TCP/IP stack. You only read Joe's blog years ago, yet you missed the talks he gave. Two years ago is not that long time ago, http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/11/03/blogging-about-midori/ http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/11/03/blogging-about-midori/ "My biggest regret is that we didn’t OSS it from the start, where the meritocracy of the Internet could judge its pieces appropriately. As with all big corporations, decisions around the destiny of Midori’s core technology weren’t entirely technology-driven, and sadly, not even entirely business-driven. But therein lies some important lessons too." http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/12/19/safe-native-code/ http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/12/19/safe-native-code/ "Over the course of 8 years, we were able to significantly narrow the gap between our version of C# and classical C/C++ systems, to the point where basic code quality, in both size of speed dimensions, was seldom the deciding factor when comparing Midori’s performance to existing workloads. In fact, something counter-intuitive happened. The ability to co-design the language, runtime, frameworks, operating system, and the compiler – making tradeoffs in one area to gain advantages in other areas – gave the compiler far more symbolic information than it ever had before about the program’s semantics and, so, I dare say, was able to exceed C and C++ performance in a non-trivial number of situations." "Safe Systems Programming in C# and .NET" https://www.infoq.com/presentations/csharp-systems-programming https://www.infoq.com/presentations/csharp-systems-programmi... "RustConf 2017 - Closing Keynote: Safe Systems Software and the Future of Computing" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuD7SCqHB7k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuD7SCqHB7k Around minute 30 he starts describing the uphill battle to convince other Microsoft teams to accept Midori achievements.
- BuckRogers 9y ago
  A TCP/IP stack isn't a stringent litmus test for a systems PL. So you can loosen your own standard for what comprises a systems PL, but Go fails more rigorous standards. Everytime. Even Rob Pike says you're wrong and he's certainly a sympathetic character towards Go. All of this was hashed out years ago upon Go's release, and the Go team took down the "systems language" moniker. That was the end of it. Google knows it's not going to fulfill stringent litmus tests for a systems-language. We'll review the subject again if the folks at Google are brazen enough to ever add it back to the website. Now Rob doesn't have to call management and let them know it's not for systems programming, Rob & Google already know it's not. He said so himself. You're the only one in the dark on that front at this point.
  - sagichmal 9y ago
    Rob never said Go wasn’t a systems programming language. He said the pedantic rules lawyering that plagued the internet after the initial claim was made — the tedious pablum that you’re continuing to propagate — was all noise and no signal, and made the claim not worth claiming anymore. For fuck’s sake, give it a rest.
    - BuckRogers 9y ago
      >Rob never said Go wasn’t a systems programming language. Yes he did. He said it's a cloud-infrastructure language[0] and that he regrets calling it a systems language. That's why he took systems language off the Golang site. >For fuck’s sake, give it a rest. Why would we when we're right? Why don't you give it a rest, you've long been proven wrong. You know, usage of the English language and the terms within matters. Claiming you have a systems language when you don't introduces confusion. You can loosen the terms all you want to but it will never change the fact that GC languages can never meet the strictest measure of a systems language. That's why it matters. No one should be apologizing to you because you don't like the facts. [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBbv1ej0fFo&feature=youtu.be&t=6m44s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBbv1ej0fFo&feature=youtu.be...
      - deleted 9y ago

pjmlp 9y ago

It doesn't matter what Rob Pike says regarding Go and systems programming, because Google, the company that employs him, has decided Go makes sense to write system components of Fucshia in Go. That is a fact, easily validated in Fuchsia's repository. According to you, Rob Pike should call management and let them know it is not a good idea to use Go for writing Fuchsia's TCP/IP stack. You only read Joe's blog years ago, yet you missed the talks he gave. Two years ago is not that long time ago, http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/11/03/blogging-about-midori/ http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/11/03/blogging-about-midori/ "My biggest regret is that we didn’t OSS it from the start, where the meritocracy of the Internet could judge its pieces appropriately. As with all big corporations, decisions around the destiny of Midori’s core technology weren’t entirely technology-driven, and sadly, not even entirely business-driven. But therein lies some important lessons too." http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/12/19/safe-native-code/ http://joeduffyblog.com/2015/12/19/safe-native-code/ "Over the course of 8 years, we were able to significantly narrow the gap between our version of C# and classical C/C++ systems, to the point where basic code quality, in both size of speed dimensions, was seldom the deciding factor when comparing Midori’s performance to existing workloads. In fact, something counter-intuitive happened. The ability to co-design the language, runtime, frameworks, operating system, and the compiler – making tradeoffs in one area to gain advantages in other areas – gave the compiler far more symbolic information than it ever had before about the program’s semantics and, so, I dare say, was able to exceed C and C++ performance in a non-trivial number of situations." "Safe Systems Programming in C# and .NET" https://www.infoq.com/presentations/csharp-systems-programming https://www.infoq.com/presentations/csharp-systems-programmi... "RustConf 2017 - Closing Keynote: Safe Systems Software and the Future of Computing" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuD7SCqHB7k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuD7SCqHB7k Around minute 30 he starts describing the uphill battle to convince other Microsoft teams to accept Midori achievements.

BuckRogers 9y ago
A TCP/IP stack isn't a stringent litmus test for a systems PL. So you can loosen your own standard for what comprises a systems PL, but Go fails more rigorous standards. Everytime. Even Rob Pike says you're wrong and he's certainly a sympathetic character towards Go. All of this was hashed out years ago upon Go's release, and the Go team took down the "systems language" moniker. That was the end of it. Google knows it's not going to fulfill stringent litmus tests for a systems-language. We'll review the subject again if the folks at Google are brazen enough to ever add it back to the website. Now Rob doesn't have to call management and let them know it's not for systems programming, Rob & Google already know it's not. He said so himself. You're the only one in the dark on that front at this point.
- sagichmal 9y ago
  Rob never said Go wasn’t a systems programming language. He said the pedantic rules lawyering that plagued the internet after the initial claim was made — the tedious pablum that you’re continuing to propagate — was all noise and no signal, and made the claim not worth claiming anymore. For fuck’s sake, give it a rest.
  - BuckRogers 9y ago
    >Rob never said Go wasn’t a systems programming language. Yes he did. He said it's a cloud-infrastructure language[0] and that he regrets calling it a systems language. That's why he took systems language off the Golang site. >For fuck’s sake, give it a rest. Why would we when we're right? Why don't you give it a rest, you've long been proven wrong. You know, usage of the English language and the terms within matters. Claiming you have a systems language when you don't introduces confusion. You can loosen the terms all you want to but it will never change the fact that GC languages can never meet the strictest measure of a systems language. That's why it matters. No one should be apologizing to you because you don't like the facts. [0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBbv1ej0fFo&feature=youtu.be&t=6m44s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBbv1ej0fFo&feature=youtu.be...
    - deleted 9y ago