4 ms·

Speed is low on my list as to why I prefer Go over Python. (In fact, Go isn't necessarily fast. It's just that Python is unnecessarily slow.) Having a decent t

by enneff 12y ago

Speed is low on my list as to why I prefer Go over Python. (In fact, Go isn't necessarily fast. It's just that Python is unnecessarily slow.) Having a decent type system and decent concurrency primitives are far more attractive.

reuven 12y ago
I've never found myself wishing for a better type system, although maybe I've just been steeped in the world of dynamic, strongly typed languages for too long. But there's no doubt that concurrency is indeed one of Python's weak points, and Go's strong points.
- kazagistar 12y ago
  I never found myself wishing for a better type system, because my idea of "static" typing came from C and Java, where it is mixed up with variable declaration, state, and a bunch of other things it has no right to be associated with. Basically, I was scarred. A good type system quietly and with minimal programmer effort encodes and documents your code, helps you find mistakes faster, guides your re-factoring, and gets out of your way when you don't want to deal with it.
ekianjo 12y ago
> It's just that Python is unnecessarily slow. It's not Python that's slow, it's CPython. If you use PyPy you get a much faster implementation of Python, not too far from Go speed.
- mimighost 12y ago
  IHMO, PyPy isn't a strong counter-argument for Python's slowness. Yes, PyPy is probably faster than CPython. But what then? In most cases, CPython is THE PYTHON. PyPy is still in its early age and has a lot to demonstrate itself as a serious alternative to CPython. On the other hand, programmer could get out-of-box performance boost from adapting Go without worrying the potential compatibility issues. PyPy is a very interesting and promising project. I highly respect that. I just don't like the idea of merely using it to dodge the blame of performance slowness, when what people are really talking about is CPython.
Daishiman 12y ago
I would say Go's type system is the least impressive of its features when compared to most other statically typed languages.

by enneff 12y ago

reuven 12y ago

I've never found myself wishing for a better type system, although maybe I've just been steeped in the world of dynamic, strongly typed languages for too long. But there's no doubt that concurrency is indeed one of Python's weak points, and Go's strong points.

kazagistar 12y ago
I never found myself wishing for a better type system, because my idea of "static" typing came from C and Java, where it is mixed up with variable declaration, state, and a bunch of other things it has no right to be associated with. Basically, I was scarred. A good type system quietly and with minimal programmer effort encodes and documents your code, helps you find mistakes faster, guides your re-factoring, and gets out of your way when you don't want to deal with it.

ekianjo 12y ago

> It's just that Python is unnecessarily slow. It's not Python that's slow, it's CPython. If you use PyPy you get a much faster implementation of Python, not too far from Go speed.

mimighost 12y ago
IHMO, PyPy isn't a strong counter-argument for Python's slowness. Yes, PyPy is probably faster than CPython. But what then? In most cases, CPython is THE PYTHON. PyPy is still in its early age and has a lot to demonstrate itself as a serious alternative to CPython. On the other hand, programmer could get out-of-box performance boost from adapting Go without worrying the potential compatibility issues. PyPy is a very interesting and promising project. I highly respect that. I just don't like the idea of merely using it to dodge the blame of performance slowness, when what people are really talking about is CPython.

Daishiman 12y ago

I would say Go's type system is the least impressive of its features when compared to most other statically typed languages.