4 ms·
Presumably you're contesting the garbage collection point? However, the statement was a conjunction of that and: - not such a constrained set of concurrency pr
by dbaupp 12y ago
Presumably you're contesting the garbage collection point? However, the statement was a conjunction of that and:
- not such a constrained set of concurrency primitives
- such a basic type system.
I imagine those languages have a good type system and/or good concurrency primitives (i.e. possibly making up for their GC "penalty").
- pjmlp 12y agoMy main point was GC, yes. Actually the original Oberon type system is simpler than Go's. Its later revision Oberon-07 is even simpler. All the other ones I mentioned, have better type systems than Go, even support for some form of generics. Concurrency depends on the language, but you get a mix of threads, co-routines, tasks, active objects and processes, overall.