3 ms·
I see too many other languages defeating Go at its strengths. The only one that survives is its fast compilation, but others are not so slow to make that a deci
by smosher 15y ago
I see too many other languages defeating Go at its strengths. The only one that survives is its fast compilation, but others are not so slow to make that a deciding factor.
If you happen to like/need its particular combination of strengths it may be a good choice, but I think much better can be done. It's a good experiment, but I think they're taking it too seriously in some regards and not seriously enough in others. I just don't see it lasting.
- supersillyus 15y agoI want a simple language that compiles to native code, has easy concurrency support, is garbage collected, allows me to distinguish between values and references, and has a compiler/standard library that is useable for real tasks. What other language betters fill that?
- smosher 15y agoThat depends. I don't have a good answer because I don't personally think Go qualifies. Rhetorically: is that really all you want out of it? Does Go really do it well enough in your opinion? The thing about compiling to native code is interesting. Why is that important? And are you excluding VM languages which nevertheless produce system binaries in that?