4 ms·
> That thing is ugly under the covers. Was the code you looked at in Go 1.5 and above? Is it cleaner in 1.4? They used automated tools to convert the C code
by self 7y ago
> That thing is ugly under the covers.
Was the code you looked at in Go 1.5 and above? Is it cleaner in 1.4? They used automated tools to convert the C code into Go for 1.5.
- marcan_42 7y agoThey were halfway through the process when I made my contribution, and in fact I had to rewrite it in Go. The Go version was just a straight conversion; being Go didn't make it inherently cleaner.
- zeveb 7y agoI think his point is that it stands to reason that machine-converted C→Go code may be pretty ugly. Maybe it was better when it was clean, Plan-9-style C? Maybe it is better now, after some number of years of cleanup?