5 ms·

As much as I like Golang, it is not a replacement for C. The major reason C is so popular because it's the only portable medium for performant code which can be

As much as I like Golang, it is not a replacement for C. The major reason C is so popular because it's the only portable medium for performant code which can be shared across many languages because it doesn't impose any runtime on you. Go comes with a VM. It lives in its own world, it cannot live in the worlds of other VMs like C can. It's more like high-performance Python (or simpler+slower C++) optimized for concurrent network services. I'd say that Rust and probably D are good candidates for replacing C.

steveklabnik 14y ago
Currently, Rust cannot go without its runtime either. The plan is that it eventually will be able to. (EDIT: VM -> runtime)
- abraininavat 14y ago
  The plan is that it eventually will be able to. To expand upon that point, Rust is designed to allow the programmer to avoid garbage collection altogether, if the programmer chooses. I believe that makes feasible the idea of using a runtime-less subset of Rust in any application where C would have been traditionally used.
  - pcwalton 14y ago
    Yes, you can use a freestanding Rust in many domains. Freestanding is still a WIP, but we have examples like embedding Rust in Ruby that work today: http://brson.github.com/2013/03/10/embedding-rust-in-ruby/ http://brson.github.com/2013/03/10/embedding-rust-in-ruby/
- mseepgood 14y ago
  Neither Go nor Rust have a VM.
  - steveklabnik 14y ago
    Yes, I meant 'runtime.' That's what I get for commenting without coffee... the parent's usage of 'VM' infected my comment.
mindslight 14y ago
The greatest trick libc ever pulled was convincing the world it didn't exist.
- jpd 14y ago
  Isn't libc just a set of libraries and therefore not considered a runtime environment? C does have a small runtime environment, but I'd say it's the existence of the function call stack, as well as the on_exit system that's built into the core language.
  - mseepgood 14y ago
    On Windows it's even called "Microsoft Visual C Run-Time" (MSVCRT): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_library_files#Msvcrt.dll_and_Msvcpp.dll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_library_files#Msvcrt.dl...
  - ori_b 14y ago
    As well as things like floating point and large integer emulation, startup code, etc. __divdi3, for example, divides 64 bit integers on i386. See /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/{crt1.o,crti.o,crtn.o,gcrt1.o,Mcrt1.o,Srct1.o}.
- coldtea 14y ago
  Well, it's so small compared to "real" runtimes, it might as well not exist.
- sixbrx 14y ago
  I think your parent comment means runtimes in the sense of a garbage collector or other services that run concurrently with user code or are scheduled periodically, which will put you in a world of hurt if you touch one of their objects without asking its permissions and/or playing by its rules.
- epsylon 14y ago
  You can compile C code without a libc.
abraininavat 14y ago
I agree. People mistake the fact "Some C people really like Go, for some of the same reasons they like C" for the falsehood "Go is a good candidate to replace C in the domains C it typically best for".
kisielk 14y ago
Go doesn't come with a VM, it comes with a runtime. Go code compiles to native machine code.
- masklinn 14y ago
  So does Haskell via GHC, that makes very little difference to the point being made.
pjmlp 14y ago
The only language that does not have a runtime is called Assembly. And even in the case of CISC processors there might be microcode playing the role of a runtime. Why don't people learn about compiler design nowadays?!
- coldtea 14y ago
  >The only language that does not have a runtime is called Assembly. And even in the case of CISC processors there might be microcode playing the role of a runtime. Why don't people learn about compiler design nowadays?! Because the C kind of runtime isn't what people regularly mean with the word "runtime" -- much less cpu microcode. That said, does Forth have a runtime?
  - pjmlp 14y ago
    > That said, does Forth have a runtime? It depends if you mean one of those Forth CPUs there were common in the 80's or the more standard Forth environment, both of which have nontheless runtimes. Because in the end, you will be using a set of words besides the basic stack manipulation ones, those words are the runtime.
- gcr 14y ago
  In one sense, Assembly does have a runtime, provided by the kernel's system call interface, not to mention all the magic that the loader has to do to make libraries work. Even the kernel has a runtime, in a less strict sense, provided by the BIOS and whatever CPU interrupts support it. The only thing that a program can do without any "runtime" at all is warm up your desk.
  - pjmlp 14y ago
    > The only thing that a program can do without any "runtime" at all is warm up your desk. +1 Funny
dsego 14y ago
Vala?
- rackman171 14y ago
  I wish the Vala folks would get going. 18 months ago, Vala, Go, and Rust were all possible native language successors to C++. (D was the fourth prospect.) But Vala has advanced so little, it's becoming an afterthought. The web site is an afterhought that sits like an interloper on the GNOME site. The Windows distros are years old, etc. It's too bad. They had a good idea; they just failed to execute.

steveklabnik 14y ago

Currently, Rust cannot go without its runtime either. The plan is that it eventually will be able to. (EDIT: VM -> runtime)

abraininavat 14y ago
The plan is that it eventually will be able to. To expand upon that point, Rust is designed to allow the programmer to avoid garbage collection altogether, if the programmer chooses. I believe that makes feasible the idea of using a runtime-less subset of Rust in any application where C would have been traditionally used.
- pcwalton 14y ago
  Yes, you can use a freestanding Rust in many domains. Freestanding is still a WIP, but we have examples like embedding Rust in Ruby that work today: http://brson.github.com/2013/03/10/embedding-rust-in-ruby/ http://brson.github.com/2013/03/10/embedding-rust-in-ruby/
mseepgood 14y ago
Neither Go nor Rust have a VM.
- steveklabnik 14y ago
  Yes, I meant 'runtime.' That's what I get for commenting without coffee... the parent's usage of 'VM' infected my comment.

mindslight 14y ago

The greatest trick libc ever pulled was convincing the world it didn't exist.

jpd 14y ago
Isn't libc just a set of libraries and therefore not considered a runtime environment? C does have a small runtime environment, but I'd say it's the existence of the function call stack, as well as the on_exit system that's built into the core language.
- mseepgood 14y ago
  On Windows it's even called "Microsoft Visual C Run-Time" (MSVCRT): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_library_files#Msvcrt.dll_and_Msvcpp.dll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_library_files#Msvcrt.dl...
- ori_b 14y ago
  As well as things like floating point and large integer emulation, startup code, etc. __divdi3, for example, divides 64 bit integers on i386. See /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/{crt1.o,crti.o,crtn.o,gcrt1.o,Mcrt1.o,Srct1.o}.
coldtea 14y ago
Well, it's so small compared to "real" runtimes, it might as well not exist.
sixbrx 14y ago
I think your parent comment means runtimes in the sense of a garbage collector or other services that run concurrently with user code or are scheduled periodically, which will put you in a world of hurt if you touch one of their objects without asking its permissions and/or playing by its rules.
epsylon 14y ago
You can compile C code without a libc.

abraininavat 14y ago

I agree. People mistake the fact "Some C people really like Go, for some of the same reasons they like C" for the falsehood "Go is a good candidate to replace C in the domains C it typically best for".

kisielk 14y ago

Go doesn't come with a VM, it comes with a runtime. Go code compiles to native machine code.

masklinn 14y ago
So does Haskell via GHC, that makes very little difference to the point being made.

pjmlp 14y ago

The only language that does not have a runtime is called Assembly. And even in the case of CISC processors there might be microcode playing the role of a runtime. Why don't people learn about compiler design nowadays?!

coldtea 14y ago
>The only language that does not have a runtime is called Assembly. And even in the case of CISC processors there might be microcode playing the role of a runtime. Why don't people learn about compiler design nowadays?! Because the C kind of runtime isn't what people regularly mean with the word "runtime" -- much less cpu microcode. That said, does Forth have a runtime?
- pjmlp 14y ago
  > That said, does Forth have a runtime? It depends if you mean one of those Forth CPUs there were common in the 80's or the more standard Forth environment, both of which have nontheless runtimes. Because in the end, you will be using a set of words besides the basic stack manipulation ones, those words are the runtime.
gcr 14y ago
In one sense, Assembly does have a runtime, provided by the kernel's system call interface, not to mention all the magic that the loader has to do to make libraries work. Even the kernel has a runtime, in a less strict sense, provided by the BIOS and whatever CPU interrupts support it. The only thing that a program can do without any "runtime" at all is warm up your desk.
- pjmlp 14y ago
  > The only thing that a program can do without any "runtime" at all is warm up your desk. +1 Funny

dsego 14y ago

Vala?

rackman171 14y ago
I wish the Vala folks would get going. 18 months ago, Vala, Go, and Rust were all possible native language successors to C++. (D was the fourth prospect.) But Vala has advanced so little, it's becoming an afterthought. The web site is an afterhought that sits like an interloper on the GNOME site. The Windows distros are years old, etc. It's too bad. They had a good idea; they just failed to execute.