4 ms·
What exactly from other small team have: - dead simple cross compiling - multi platforms / arch ( there are many for Go: https://gist.github.com/asukakenji/f1
by Thaxll 8y ago
What exactly from other small team have:
- dead simple cross compiling
- multi platforms / arch ( there are many for Go: https://gist.github.com/asukakenji/f15ba7e588ac42795f421b48b8aede63 https://gist.github.com/asukakenji/f15ba7e588ac42795f421b48b... )
- no dependencies
- fast compilation
- good performance
- good debugging
- rock solid and production ready
I don't know any compiler from smaller team that matches the Go one, it's one of the reason why people use Go, compiling things is fast and easy, from my raspbery pi I can compile a win10 64bits exec with 0 problems 0 tools to install. ( ex: GOOS=windows GOARCH=amd64 go build . )
- coldtea 8y agoNone of those are arguments for "PL experts" as none of those are specifically signs of superior PL expertise. Multiple platforms for example are mainly about adoption (and not having much optimizations/assembly parts in the codebase, making it easier to port). Fast compilation is something several languages manage. And being fast to compile because you don't do much (in the way of optimizations) is something most languages can manage. "No dependencies" is also about adoption and resources (to replace popular dependencies). Nothing particular related to PL/compiler expertise about it. Go never had a "good debugging" story, and it doesn't have the best performance either (e.g. compare with Rust, D, Crystal, etc). In certain areas like text processing it's even worse.
- foldr 8y ago> none of those are specifically signs of superior PL expertise. If none of the things on that list is a sign of superior PL expertise, one would have to ask whether PL expertise is actually worth very much.