4 ms·

> Go has a rich standard library which covers a lot of areas. The last time I've looked at it there wasn't queue, deque, stack libraries in standard library. T

> Go has a rich standard library which covers a lot of areas. The last time I've looked at it there wasn't queue, deque, stack libraries in standard library. There wasn't even a UUID library. I'm not sure if it has these libraries in 1.1. > In fact, Go is probably the only language that can claim to have a fully working Web server as part of its standard library. Python has a built-in HTTP server (including a CGI one too). > Go has built-in concurrency, which allows parallelism in an easier way than is possible in other languages. How does Go make it easier than those unnamed languages? Go didn't even have race detection tool until 1.1.

tptacek 13y ago
Python's built-in HTTP server isn't well-suited for production apps. Golang's HTTP server is the production standard. That's not an apples-apples comparison. Ruby and Python "have" stacks, queues, and (in Python's case) deques, but they're rarely used, because, like Golang, they have a flexible variable-length array ADT and a table ADT. Golang has lists and rings, along with slices and maps, which capture "queue" and "stack" easily. More importantly, unlike Python and Ruby, Golang provides direct control over memory layout and a safe pointer abstraction; it's much better suited to building fussy data structure libraries than Ruby or Python. I'm not sure I'd choose a language based on the richness of its UUID libraries. It's funny to critique a language for "not even having" a tool that few other development environments have "until 1.1".
- gnuvince 13y ago
  > Ruby and Python "have" stacks, queues, and (in Python's case) deques, but they're rarely used, because, like Golang, they have a flexible variable-length array ADT and a table ADT. When all you have is a hammer...
  - tptacek 13y ago
    The reality is that Python lists usually work as serviceable queues and stacks. Criticizing a language for not having a standard queue or stack is a little weird.

tptacek 13y ago

Python's built-in HTTP server isn't well-suited for production apps. Golang's HTTP server is the production standard. That's not an apples-apples comparison. Ruby and Python "have" stacks, queues, and (in Python's case) deques, but they're rarely used, because, like Golang, they have a flexible variable-length array ADT and a table ADT. Golang has lists and rings, along with slices and maps, which capture "queue" and "stack" easily. More importantly, unlike Python and Ruby, Golang provides direct control over memory layout and a safe pointer abstraction; it's much better suited to building fussy data structure libraries than Ruby or Python. I'm not sure I'd choose a language based on the richness of its UUID libraries. It's funny to critique a language for "not even having" a tool that few other development environments have "until 1.1".

gnuvince 13y ago
> Ruby and Python "have" stacks, queues, and (in Python's case) deques, but they're rarely used, because, like Golang, they have a flexible variable-length array ADT and a table ADT. When all you have is a hammer...
- tptacek 13y ago
  The reality is that Python lists usually work as serviceable queues and stacks. Criticizing a language for not having a standard queue or stack is a little weird.