5 ms·
> It's not really "go" that makes the difference But from what I've seen and read about Go, it does seem to have things in it that do make a difference. For e
by jussij 14y ago
> It's not really "go" that makes the difference
But from what I've seen and read about Go, it does seem to have things in it that do make a difference.
For example from day one Go was designed for with concurrency in mind and that's a big plus.
To see how this can help this Rob Pike video does a good job of showing off Go's version of concurrency:
http://blog.golang.org/2013/01/concurrency-is-not-parallelism.html http://blog.golang.org/2013/01/concurrency-is-not-parallelis...
Now, you can implement concurrency lots of different ways using many different languages. But I've used a lot of languages and I never seen concurrency done as easily as shown in that video.
- masklinn 14y ago> But I've used a lot of languages and I never seen concurrency done as easily as shown in that video. So I take it you never used Erlang.
- Ziomislaw 14y agoErlang is big and complicated compared to Go. It's not easy, and besides it is functional (not easy) which already makes it unusable by 90% of people.
- masklinn 14y ago> Erlang is big and complicated compared to Go. No. OTP is big (arguably), Erlang isn't even remotely. It's also completely irrelevant to OP's remark. > It's not easy, and besides it is functional (not easy) That doesn't make sense. What's hard in Erlang? That you don't have a for loop?
- tel 14y agoOTP is big an complicated... Erlang really isn't.