4 ms·
I know V for over promising in the past, a quick scan over the syntax really looks like how Go should've designed (can't really blame Go early design decisions,
by norman784 2y ago
I know V for over promising in the past, a quick scan over the syntax really looks like how Go should've designed (can't really blame Go early design decisions, for me was not until Rust that I learned about the good side of functional programming languages, before that I didn't knew they ever existed.
- baranul 2y agoBut Go was not trying to be functional, but more general-purpose ease of use. V (Vlang), moves a bit closer to functional, while keeping the ease of use of its Go heritage. Rust builds on top of its OCaml heritage, however, this creates a lot of confusion because of the verbosity and syntax differences from what people are used to with other C-like languages. Definitely, V (Vlang) is in the trajectory of a better Go or Go and C alternative. When you read V (Vlang), you can see how it's improving upon or advancing various Go concepts, while being C-like. Rust, because of the OCaml heritage, is a bit both odd and unique. It's positioned as a C/C++ replacement or alternative, but there is no easy recognition or transition from those languages. Possibly why there is a lot of friction and controversy surrounding Rust, as people haven't familiarized themselves with (or don't want to) with OCaml and that family of languages.