4 ms·
Of course one shouldn't mistake those. But one has to understand, a tool is only as valuable as it actually produces result, not as what it could produce given
by _ph_ 6y ago
Of course one shouldn't mistake those. But one has to understand, a tool is only as valuable as it actually produces result, not as what it could produce given a theoretical perfect programmer. C is an extremely capable programming language judging on "what you could do with it", but in reality, most programmers fail to create robust C code. And most Java code suffers from programmers using it in a less than optimal manner.
Also, Go does not suffer from some fundamental Java problems, though they slowly get corrected. Go has value types, unboxed arrays. Generally, no struct in Go is boxed automatically. You have first class functions in Go and of course, it is statically compiled. It is true, that Hotspot often produces very good code, but for a lot of szenarios, a statically compiled Go executable beats it, as run-time compilation is not required.
- pjmlp 6y agoJava also has AOT compilation to native code, if one is willing to pay for such tools (since around 2000, but now there is free beer AOT anyway). Value types are around the corner and I bet they will be done first than generics in Go.
- _ph_ 6y agoAs I wrote, Java is in the process of adding features that mitigate its problems. My post was pointing out a few things where Go is clearly ahead of Java.
- pjmlp 6y agoOnly on support for value types, everything else Java did it first.
- philosopher1234 6y agoYou are prolific in your hatred of go
- pjmlp 6y agoNah, just when people push their fanboyism against Java, .NET or C++, without actually knowing those ecosystems.