4 ms·
Wait... We must having different definition of perfect. I would say Go is a very good language, and probably be one of the best in terms of simple and practical
by namelosw 7y ago
Wait... We must having different definition of perfect. I would say Go is a very good language, and probably be one of the best in terms of simple and practical design, fast execution, fast compilation etc.
The perfection, however, is not something Go never meant to be. The perfect language possibly support fully dependent type like Idris while maintains zero abstraction cost like Rust, having precise syntax rule like Lisp, and a powerful runtime like Erlang, and the list goes on.
The success of Go lies in it's trade-offs, the designers are opinionated, knowing well what they want and what they don't, and executes things well in the implementation.
- agumonkey 7y agopirlelang: perfect idris rust lisp erlang
- networkimprov 7y agoZig might become the perfect language, assuming OOP is not must-have :-) https://ziglang.org/ https://ziglang.org/
- lazyjones 7y agoBut it has pointless semicolons. No, thanks. ;-)
- coldtea 7y agoI like "pointless semicolons" and other redundant info to help the parser (and make things more explicit)
- Avamander 7y agoSo what we want is a typed compile-able Python? :D
- apta 7y agogolang puts semicolons behind the scenes anyway, resulting in bizarre behaviors like not being able to write braces that follow "if" or "for" on separate lines.
- lazyjones 7y agoIt's not "bizarre", just a tradeoff explained here: https://golang.org/doc/faq#semicolons https://golang.org/doc/faq#semicolons If they thought it mattered much, they'd change it... But since the code should be formatted correctly always, it's not necessary.