3 ms·

You're being disrespectful. > No mission-critical software, no application software with millions of installations (except Go compilers). Yes. NOOO software w

You're being disrespectful. > No mission-critical software, no application software with millions of installations (except Go compilers). Yes. NOOO software with millions of installations. Except Go compilers. Which doesn't count? (And I don't even know, there might be more). He is an accomplished engineer. UTF-8 is one of the best designs I know. Unix is still around, despite its shortcomings. He's written books and been around some of the gods of software and OS engineering. Regarding Plan 9, I'm not positive that it is a toy operating system. I've never used it. It tried to improve on Unix and might (or might not) have achieved that in many ways. It's named as an inspiration by Linus Torvalds. What do you have to show?

ernst_klim 8y ago
>Yes. NOOO software with millions of installations. Except Go compilers. So the grand experience of Rob being the justification of Go's design is the Go compiler itself? Besides, Go compiler is ridiculous if you compare it to things like llvm, gcc, ghc, CompCert. >UTF-8 is one of the best designs I know. Not a software. >Unix is still around, despite its shortcomings 1) he didn't create Unix and 2) modern unix has pretty nothing in common with the bell labs unix. >I've never used it. So let's draw the conclusion: the enormous engineering background of Pike -- which tends to be a justification of Go's "suitable for real world apps not academic masturbation" design -- consists of writing a simplistic academic operating system nobody used (you included) and UTF-8 which is not even a software? That's big, but I'll stick to Ada or C++, languages with real industrial background.