4 ms·

>All of the thumbs-up opinions I share, with the emphasis on that Go fills a niche that is otherwise a relative vacuum as-is. D, Rust, modern C++, ...

• fdr 14y ago
  Disagree. D is but one language (which does not, in and of itself does not fill a vacuum), and I have serious doubts about the social situation regarding its compilers. However, I think it meets most of the other criteria. It also has a lot of features (but not so ridiculously many as C++), however, I'd say it's closer to C++ than C in terms of language size. Rust is brand new, pre 1.0, and I'm following it with great interest. I do not intend to use it until the low-level error handling has been fleshed out: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2012-March/001454.html https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2012-March/00145... Qualitatively, C++ feels closer to C than Go in many ways in terms of debugging and system aspects, and many C++ programs are written in the "just enough C++" style, which is very nearly C -- and of all possible evils, that is probably the least-evil one in my eyes. Notably, C++ and D both have have try/catch/finally-style exceptions and inheritance, and while these features can be handy in specific situations, I think both are not desirable. These also apply to Python, a language I also basically like, but I prefer to not have them.
  • commentzorro 14y ago
    You're kidding right? Nothing stops you from writing any of these languages in a style like Go that doesn't use multiple inheritance and uses error codes. I suspect what's going unspoken is that you prefer others to code like you think instead of how they think. And Go gives you that because, at times above all arguments to the contrary, it strives to have only one way to do something at the language level.