3 ms·

yes absolutely agree. Go is better than plain C, but people aren't using it for things C is used for which I think makes a big difference. When it comes to dev

yes absolutely agree. Go is better than plain C, but people aren't using it for things C is used for which I think makes a big difference. When it comes to developing software applications, the really weak type system of Go is frankly just causing developer pain. IMHO, generics are the missing feature in this language, just try writing a generic map or reduce function in Go and the amount of code you have to duplicate is ridiculous. Interfaces and using relection is not safe and annoying and having all the XXXInt, XXXFloat, XXXMyType is crazyness too. For what its worth, my dream language would be Julia's type system grafted onto Go.

pjmlp 12y ago
I moved on, and stayed on my comfy JVM/.NET/C++ world, but won't have any issues using it if a customer asks for a project on it.
- personZ 12y ago
  I moved on This caught my eye because I recall you being someone who has vigorously criticized Go in every single Go discussion. A quick search and I can find lengthy critiques from you going back four years. It very much seems like you haven't moved on.
  - Dewie 12y ago
    I think he has moved on in the sense that he doesn't develop in Go anymore.
    - personZ 12y ago
      Given that he has been talking about how much Go sucks for almost the entirety of its existence, I highly doubt they've ever developed in Go. It became something to be an advocate against, not a tool in the belt.
      - pjmlp 12y ago
        I used Go before it went 1.0 and tried to contribute to os.user and some other experimental packages back in the early days.
      - coldtea 12y ago
        You'd be surprised. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-dev/Zx2uSqvMS0Q/q816JGc412gJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-dev/Zx2uSqvMS0Q...
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    I moved on in the sense that I am not arguing about it any longer. If you read correctly my post, I just said I would like to see the discussion about generics take into account what other generic systems besides Java and C++ offer. In those four years as you say, I have never seen such a document, even most discussions on gonuts went around Java, C++ and .NET implementations. There are mentions that a prototype was made, yet the conclusions haven't been shared with the outside world. If the designers don't want to implement generics, I can always look to Go as Active Oberon with C like syntax. I see more value arguing about using Go for user space applications that are still made in C, just because the authors needed a compiled language than arguing about the essence of generics in Go. That boat has long left. Edit: Just got to read Ian's opinion, quite interesting.
borkadorka 12y ago
> my dream language would be Julia's type system grafted onto Go With Julia's type system you get a really good parametric multiple dispatch, which is a completely different (and more satisfying, to me) way to organize code than in Go. Go wouldn't be Go at all with Julia's type system. If that's what you want, why not just program in Julia?

pjmlp 12y ago

I moved on, and stayed on my comfy JVM/.NET/C++ world, but won't have any issues using it if a customer asks for a project on it.

personZ 12y ago
I moved on This caught my eye because I recall you being someone who has vigorously criticized Go in every single Go discussion. A quick search and I can find lengthy critiques from you going back four years. It very much seems like you haven't moved on.
- Dewie 12y ago
  I think he has moved on in the sense that he doesn't develop in Go anymore.
  - personZ 12y ago
    Given that he has been talking about how much Go sucks for almost the entirety of its existence, I highly doubt they've ever developed in Go. It became something to be an advocate against, not a tool in the belt.
    - pjmlp 12y ago
      I used Go before it went 1.0 and tried to contribute to os.user and some other experimental packages back in the early days.
    - coldtea 12y ago
      You'd be surprised. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-dev/Zx2uSqvMS0Q/q816JGc412gJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-dev/Zx2uSqvMS0Q...
- pjmlp 12y ago
  I moved on in the sense that I am not arguing about it any longer. If you read correctly my post, I just said I would like to see the discussion about generics take into account what other generic systems besides Java and C++ offer. In those four years as you say, I have never seen such a document, even most discussions on gonuts went around Java, C++ and .NET implementations. There are mentions that a prototype was made, yet the conclusions haven't been shared with the outside world. If the designers don't want to implement generics, I can always look to Go as Active Oberon with C like syntax. I see more value arguing about using Go for user space applications that are still made in C, just because the authors needed a compiled language than arguing about the essence of generics in Go. That boat has long left. Edit: Just got to read Ian's opinion, quite interesting.

borkadorka 12y ago

> my dream language would be Julia's type system grafted onto Go With Julia's type system you get a really good parametric multiple dispatch, which is a completely different (and more satisfying, to me) way to organize code than in Go. Go wouldn't be Go at all with Julia's type system. If that's what you want, why not just program in Julia?