3 ms·

Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Go would just get forked by the community an

by thiht 6y ago

Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Go would just get forked by the community and that's it. As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, they don't matter at all regarding what a product can do. Also they're planned in Go for next year.

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 6y ago
> Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Have you ever used a library where the company who paid the development went "whoops, not our product anymore! poof goes the paid team, website, the community forums, the knowledgebase" ? Usually nobody continues to maintain these after 90% of the workforce behind them gets fired and the surrounding infrastructure disappears. Software is almost worthless without the brains behind it. > As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, So you propose people write the 100,000th implementation of linked lists, maps, etc. because what they want to stick into it is not class A but class B? > Also they're planned in Go for next year. The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It might have been nice as a toy to teach aspiring programmers. It shouldn't have ended up in production software. > Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Thanks. I consider yours as stupid too. How much progress exactly have we achieved with this wording now?
- thiht 6y ago
  It's pretty clear you're trolling now, but FWIW: - slices and maps are already generic in Go - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners - Go is a language, not a library > The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It's not. Really.
  - eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 6y ago
    > It's pretty clear you're trolling now I am not. I genuinely think Google is evil and should be dismantled. > - slices and maps are already generic in Go So people are supposed to not rewrite 2 of the possibly infinite types of data structures and classes, and constantly rewrite all the rest of them? > - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners Enough other languages do as well. > Go is a language, not a library If Google abandons the funding it does not matter what it technically is. No money, no developers.

by thiht 6y ago

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 6y ago

> Go is open source. Even if Google went rogue, there's nothing they could do. Have you ever used a library where the company who paid the development went "whoops, not our product anymore! poof goes the paid team, website, the community forums, the knowledgebase" ? Usually nobody continues to maintain these after 90% of the workforce behind them gets fired and the surrounding infrastructure disappears. Software is almost worthless without the brains behind it. > As for generics, they're just nothing more than a developer convenience, So you propose people write the 100,000th implementation of linked lists, maps, etc. because what they want to stick into it is not class A but class B? > Also they're planned in Go for next year. The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It might have been nice as a toy to teach aspiring programmers. It shouldn't have ended up in production software. > Damn, these are some stupid arguments. Thanks. I consider yours as stupid too. How much progress exactly have we achieved with this wording now?

thiht 6y ago
It's pretty clear you're trolling now, but FWIW: - slices and maps are already generic in Go - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners - Go is a language, not a library > The fact it took years to plan them instead of including them right away is a nice proof of how ill-conceived Go is as a language. It's not. Really.
- eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 6y ago
  > It's pretty clear you're trolling now I am not. I genuinely think Google is evil and should be dismantled. > - slices and maps are already generic in Go So people are supposed to not rewrite 2 of the possibly infinite types of data structures and classes, and constantly rewrite all the rest of them? > - Go has great performance, great readability and write ability, and that's valuable for everyone, not just beginners Enough other languages do as well. > Go is a language, not a library If Google abandons the funding it does not matter what it technically is. No money, no developers.