4 ms·
Right, but the languages that are looking at async/await weren't designed with that in mind. You could do a major overhaul of the language, or you could bolt on
by tghw 11y ago
Right, but the languages that are looking at async/await weren't designed with that in mind. You could do a major overhaul of the language, or you could bolt on async/await. While Go/Erlang's way of doing things might be preferable to some, I'm not sure I see async/await as being bad enough to justify a major language overhaul.
- PopsiclePete 11y agoWith the world going multi-core more and more, the question that comes to my mind is - are the languages designed without concurrency in mind doomed to fail? It seems C++/C#/Java all look at concurrency/parallel programming as an afterthought - another library here, another library there, but none of them approach it as a fundamental programming necessity, on the same level as a basic loop or "if" statement. Ultimately, it's possible to be semi-successful in designing scalable, concurrency-aware software with just after-thought libraries and language support, but is that really the way forward, long-term?