3 ms·
Go has a spec, which has been used to make gccgo. I'm not very familiar with other specs: is it fair to say that the Go spec is less detailed and so was able to
by earthboundkid 7y ago
Go has a spec, which has been used to make gccgo. I'm not very familiar with other specs: is it fair to say that the Go spec is less detailed and so was able to be completed before 1.0? Is it "not a real spec" compared to ANSI C, ECMA, etc.?
- steveklabnik 7y agoI have not read the Go spec, and so I can't really comment. However, you do also bring up something that's a good point when it comes to this discussion: a lot of people treat "a spec" as a binary thing: a language has it, or does not have it. But specs are written by humans, and have their own mistakes, bugs, errata, etc. One of the reasons that we haven't wanted to declare "this is the spec for Rust" is that we want to have a good, possibly even formally verifiable spec. The reference is basically at a fairly reasonable informal spec level.