3 ms·

> it seems initially it was meant to be those kind of "systems" From the announcement talk: "And it's a systems language in the sense that we intend it to be u

> it seems initially it was meant to be those kind of "systems" From the announcement talk: "And it's a systems language in the sense that we intend it to be used to write things like web servers" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKnDgT73v8s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKnDgT73v8s I don't think that Google ever wanted to develop a new OS kernel.

rdtsc 13y ago
> From the announcement talk From the announcement blog (and that was the widely circulated quote in tech news not the video transcript): --- Go combines the development speed of working in a dynamic language like Python with the performance and safety of a compiled language like C or C++. [...] And the compiled code runs close to the speed of C [...] Go is a great language for systems programming with support for multi-processing ... --- http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2009/11/hey-ho-lets-go.html http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2009/11/hey-ho-lets-go... > I don't think that Google ever wanted to develop a new OS kernel. As the meme goes, they keep using the word "systems", I don't think it means what they think it means.
- wglb 13y ago
  Jeez. These dudes were writing "systems" long before most folks here on HN were programming. To me, and to them, "systems programming" has a particular meaning that does not include kernels. Like it means assemblers, compilers, web servers.j I think they have more credibility about what it means than perhaps you do.
  - dbaupp 13y ago
    Before many HNers were even born too.
- frou_dh 13y ago
  It's a tough crowd when being the authors of both the Unix and Plan 9 kernels isn't sufficient to get the benefit of the doubt on this matter!
  - SkyMarshal 13y ago
    That's probably the problem. When those guys say "systems", people expect they mean OS/kernel-level stuff.
- justin66 13y ago
  > As the meme goes, they keep using the word "systems", I don't think it means what they think it means. I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean what you think it means. The only title I have on my bookshelf which has "Systems Programming" in the title is System Software: An Introduction to Systems Programming. The book is about creating assemblers and compilers for a made-up architecture called SIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIC/XE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIC/XE This is neither here nor there, but the point is that a fair number of accomplished people in the field were apparently at one time less hung up about precisely what "systems programming" might mean and (this is just conjecture on my part, since honestly, who cares?) probably just used it as a contrast with applications programming.
- nl 13y ago
  This is possible the worst example of selective quoting I've seen on HN. From the bit you left out: Want to write a server with thousands of communicating threads? It's always been clear what kind of apps Go is targeted at, and it's never been operating systems.

rdtsc 13y ago

> From the announcement talk From the announcement blog (and that was the widely circulated quote in tech news not the video transcript): --- Go combines the development speed of working in a dynamic language like Python with the performance and safety of a compiled language like C or C++. [...] And the compiled code runs close to the speed of C [...] Go is a great language for systems programming with support for multi-processing ... --- http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2009/11/hey-ho-lets-go.html http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2009/11/hey-ho-lets-go... > I don't think that Google ever wanted to develop a new OS kernel. As the meme goes, they keep using the word "systems", I don't think it means what they think it means.

wglb 13y ago
Jeez. These dudes were writing "systems" long before most folks here on HN were programming. To me, and to them, "systems programming" has a particular meaning that does not include kernels. Like it means assemblers, compilers, web servers.j I think they have more credibility about what it means than perhaps you do.
- dbaupp 13y ago
  Before many HNers were even born too.
frou_dh 13y ago
It's a tough crowd when being the authors of both the Unix and Plan 9 kernels isn't sufficient to get the benefit of the doubt on this matter!
- SkyMarshal 13y ago
  That's probably the problem. When those guys say "systems", people expect they mean OS/kernel-level stuff.
justin66 13y ago
> As the meme goes, they keep using the word "systems", I don't think it means what they think it means. I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean what you think it means. The only title I have on my bookshelf which has "Systems Programming" in the title is System Software: An Introduction to Systems Programming. The book is about creating assemblers and compilers for a made-up architecture called SIC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIC/XE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIC/XE This is neither here nor there, but the point is that a fair number of accomplished people in the field were apparently at one time less hung up about precisely what "systems programming" might mean and (this is just conjecture on my part, since honestly, who cares?) probably just used it as a contrast with applications programming.
nl 13y ago
This is possible the worst example of selective quoting I've seen on HN. From the bit you left out: Want to write a server with thousands of communicating threads? It's always been clear what kind of apps Go is targeted at, and it's never been operating systems.