4 ms·
No. D is a rethinking of C++. Go is a re-imagining of C++.
by sambeau 15y ago
No.
D is a rethinking of C++.
Go is a re-imagining of C++.
- hasenj 15y agoGo seems more like an imagining of what a modern descendent of C should be like. It's not just about classes; it's also about concurrency. Although D2 did have some concurrency ideas, I think Go does a much better job at figuring out how to solve concurrency problems on modern hardware.
- andralex 15y agoI disagree. As far as I can tell, Go is a resolute step backwards from C++ in efficiency, modeling power, and generic programming. That's not necessarily bad; simplicity has its virtue, too. The larger problem is that Go fails to avail itself of the progress in programming languages theory and practice in the past 30 years.
- uriel 15y agoGo is specially a huge step backwards from C++ in convoluted insanity.
- thetruthsayer 15y ago+1 this man made a very rational comment. Simplicity is going to win one day.
- deadalnix 15y agoas well as D.
- andralex 15y agowithout throwing the good parts away.
- sambeau 15y agoTo explain: D took C++ and improved upon it. Go went back to C and said, "what if C++ had never existed".
- andralex 15y ago... "and if we were still in 1981".
- hasenj 15y agoNot really. Go was designed with at least these 2 ideas in mind: - Modern web servers - Modern multi-core CPUs None of which existed in 1981
- pjmlp 15y agoNone of the Go ideas are new. And in 1981 there were already application servers, running in multiprocessor machines using Multics, UNIX and VMS, just to name a few operating systems. Personally I see Go as a better C, nothing more.
- sambeau 15y ago"Personally I see Go as a better C, nothing more." Which is a good thing, right?
- pjmlp 15y agoSure, we need safer systems languages.
- sambeau 15y agoTo be fair, the way Go uses interfaces is new.
- pjmlp 15y agoThe only thing new about them is that you don't need to write "implements" or something similar.