3 ms·
> That nothing about it’s good You have a very myopic view of what makes concurrency designs good. I suggest you broaden your perspective, and consider the pr
by philosopher1234 4y ago
> That nothing about it’s good
You have a very myopic view of what makes concurrency designs good.
I suggest you broaden your perspective, and consider the practical effects of language design on humans, as opposed to just mathematically provable safety.
- masklinn 4y agoAh, you’re a fanboy. You could have just put that upfront I would not have wasted my time taking you seriously.
- philosopher1234 4y agoYou wrote "That nothing about it’s good". That's stupid. I agree we are wasting our time.
- Smurfix 4y agoWell, Ok, so the main thing that's good about it is that it's dead easy to start a goroutine. But that's actually bad, just like randomly jumping to any piece of code whatsoever is bad in in a procedural language. Read the Structured Concurrency notes (https://vorpus.org/blog/notes-on-structured-concurrency-or-go-statement-considered-harmful/ https://vorpus.org/blog/notes-on-structured-concurrency-or-g...) for the reasons why.
- philosopher1234 4y agoI don’t know. I think the culture around go encourages effective/safe strategies for using go routines + channels. I think when channels are used as intended they can be quite effective. They’re not technically more safe than anything else, but I think the fact that they make concurrency more manageable is good.