4 ms·

So Nim is more expressive and concise than Go. OK.

• zamalek 12y ago
  To be fair, in some cases[1] the code in Go has error handling and the code in Nim doesn't. In other cases the Go code does more things[2]. Nim is no doubt more expressive and concise than Go, but this comparison is seriously unfair in some situations. In addition, although Go is concise on the absolute scale I don't think it ever set out to be the most concise - it solves the problems that it set out to solve. [1]: http://rosetta.alhur.es/compare/nimrod/go/#Read_entire_file http://rosetta.alhur.es/compare/nimrod/go/#Read_entire_file [2]: http://rosetta.alhur.es/compare/nimrod/go/#Zero_to_the_zero_power http://rosetta.alhur.es/compare/nimrod/go/#Zero_to_the_zero_...
  • deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  • voidlogic 12y ago
    Not only that, on LOC is the goal; the Go code isn't written in most terse form, there are numerous unnecessary newlines and they do things like: Examples: cmd.Stdout = os.Stdout cmd.Stderr = os.Stderr vs cmd.Stdout, cmd.Stderr = os.Stdout, os.Stderr and: if open == 0 { fmt.Println("ok") } else { fmt.Println("not ok") } vs. if open == 0 { fmt.Println("ok") return } fmt.Println("not ok")
    • jbooth 12y ago
      Your first example is a great counter-point to the talk above about "if more stuff can fit on the screen it's easier to understand". I personally really prefer the 2-line construction.
• pjmlp 12y ago
  As any language designed in the last decade.
  • nailer 12y ago
    Go is only eight years old.
    • thescrewdriver 12y ago
      Fair enough, but syntax-wise it looks like it was designed in the 80's or 90's. Some people see that as a good thing.
      • k__ 12y ago
        Many programmers don't like indentation blocks. Can't tell why. I think it's awesome. Languages like Ruby suddenly seem like they got a bunch of strange ends dangling all over the place.