4 ms·
We need new languages and ideas to keep developing, obviously if someone is willing to put a lots of time and effort they found existing ones lack in something.
by mapcars 3y ago
We need new languages and ideas to keep developing, obviously if someone is willing to put a lots of time and effort they found existing ones lack in something. Even if the difference is only 20%.
Talking specifically about Go, how much time did it take for Go team to acknowledge and make some workarounds to support generics? And this is not a new concept it exists for more than 30 years. I can not imaging Go actually developing and incorporating new things, it is a simple and "completed" language.
- kaba0 3y agoSo what are the new ideas around V? It literally does the same thing as Go, and as you correctly recognize, Go was already thoroughly uninteresting when it came out from a PL perspective, the only remotely interesting part is its goroutines (though not even that is unique). V doesn’t even have that, so there are like 10 languages just like that with slightly different syntax.
- amedvednikov 3y agoIt improves on Go a lot: https://vlang.io/compare#go https://vlang.io/compare#go
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mapcars 3y agoI don't know much about V, I was answering why new languages are a good thing in general, even if they seem very similar to another. And I don't think every new language has to have some unique feature too. You can compare almost any modern "scripting" language for example to Common Lisp and ask why they exist, but they do and they enable lots of developers just fine.
- kaba0 3y agoThey don’t need a unique feature, but they do need at least a unique combination of existing features — languages are as much determined by what features they have as what they don’t. But V fails to make me interested on this count as well.