5 ms·

I like go. As a guy who really doesn't like javascript I like the structure of GO. I like really structured languages. For anyone who like the mobile/desktop ty

by Radzell 15y ago

I like go. As a guy who really doesn't like javascript I like the structure of GO. I like really structured languages. For anyone who like the mobile/desktop type of programming this seems like a refreshing change.

ootachi 15y ago
Er, JavaScript is a structured language (meaning it doesn't mandate labels and goto for control flow).
- brnstz 15y ago
  Many programmers educated in the OOP days don't know the term "structured programming". I once interviewed someone who called a Pascal-like language "functional". We hired him anyway.
  - Radzell 15y ago
    From what I here there not enough programmers around so you might of not had a choice.
- enneff 15y ago
  I think what your parent is referring to is that, compared to JavaScript, Go provides a fairly rigid structure in which to write programs. You write packages that consist of type, function, and variable declarations, and link them together with import statements. Its rich standard library supports a range of useful, omnipresent interfaces, which make it easy to do things in an obviously correct, interoperable way. By comparison, JavaScript lets you structure your code in however you like, and there is a very tiny standard library and no real uniformity across implementations, frameworks, and so on. This can be a strength, but I think on balance it is a real weakness in JS. node.js has done a lot to improve this, though the language itself still lets you define anything, anywhere, at any time, and change that state from anywhere else.
  - ootachi 15y ago
    "By comparison, JavaScript lets you structure your code in however you like, and there is a very tiny standard library and no real uniformity across implementations, frameworks, and so on. This can be a strength, but I think on balance it is a real weakness in JS. node.js has done a lot to improve this, though the language itself still lets you define anything, anywhere, at any time, and change that state from anywhere else." Not true with ES6 modules. Besides, Python and Ruby have open modules, and that hasn't hurt their usefulness in the real world. Quite the opposite, actually; one of the great pragmatic strengths of Rails was that it monkey patched Ruby's standard libraries. It's hurt optimization, but that's a different story.

by Radzell 15y ago

ootachi 15y ago

Er, JavaScript is a structured language (meaning it doesn't mandate labels and goto for control flow).

brnstz 15y ago
Many programmers educated in the OOP days don't know the term "structured programming". I once interviewed someone who called a Pascal-like language "functional". We hired him anyway.
- Radzell 15y ago
  From what I here there not enough programmers around so you might of not had a choice.
enneff 15y ago
I think what your parent is referring to is that, compared to JavaScript, Go provides a fairly rigid structure in which to write programs. You write packages that consist of type, function, and variable declarations, and link them together with import statements. Its rich standard library supports a range of useful, omnipresent interfaces, which make it easy to do things in an obviously correct, interoperable way. By comparison, JavaScript lets you structure your code in however you like, and there is a very tiny standard library and no real uniformity across implementations, frameworks, and so on. This can be a strength, but I think on balance it is a real weakness in JS. node.js has done a lot to improve this, though the language itself still lets you define anything, anywhere, at any time, and change that state from anywhere else.
- ootachi 15y ago
  "By comparison, JavaScript lets you structure your code in however you like, and there is a very tiny standard library and no real uniformity across implementations, frameworks, and so on. This can be a strength, but I think on balance it is a real weakness in JS. node.js has done a lot to improve this, though the language itself still lets you define anything, anywhere, at any time, and change that state from anywhere else." Not true with ES6 modules. Besides, Python and Ruby have open modules, and that hasn't hurt their usefulness in the real world. Quite the opposite, actually; one of the great pragmatic strengths of Rails was that it monkey patched Ruby's standard libraries. It's hurt optimization, but that's a different story.