Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th Feb 2013 22:59 UTC
General Development "I feel like writing about the Go programming language (or 'Golang') today, so instead today's topic is computer stuff. For the record, the language I've programmed the most in has been Python, so that’s the perspective I'm analyzing it from." Some good and bad things about Go.
Thread beginning with comment 552200
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Meh
by moondevil on Tue 12th Feb 2013 08:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Meh"
Member since:

I took a look at Rust awhile ago... but it just didn't look like a fun language to use. So I'm curious about why you find it more suitable than Go.

- Macros
- Proper type inference a la ML
- generics
- non nullable types
- sum types
- exceptions

The only thing I don't like in Rust is the Perl syntax influence in how pointers get declared.

D is one of those languages that I keep meaning to poke at, but never get around to (because there's really nothing there except nicer syntax.)

It is really a better C++, not only syntax.

You get to do meta-programming with proper language support, not the C++ template hacks.

Safer than C++, because you are require to state which code is unsafe. In C++ even if you restrict yourself to the safe language constructs, you need a static analyzer to proof it.

Whereas D is safe by default unless you make use of system modules/sections.

Go strides exited already in D before Go was created.

Additionally both languages have:

- some form of automatic memory management
- modules
- support for concurrency
- follow the school of thought where the developers have the same facilities as the compiler writers to create data structures.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Meh
by satsujinka on Tue 12th Feb 2013 17:30 in reply to "RE[2]: Meh"
satsujinka Member since:

As I said, I keep meaning to get around to looking at D, but safe by default and meta-programming aren't things that are new to me (so there's not really much motivation to learn.)

Of the things you listed for Rust, sum types are really the only thing I miss in Go... and it's hardly worth learning a language for a feature that can be found better elsewhere.

Really, I only learned Go because of it's built in co-routine syntax. I felt it was as good of a place as any to really buckle down on concurrency (since I don't have to do much/any in my day job.)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Meh
by shmerl on Tue 12th Feb 2013 17:55 in reply to "RE[3]: Meh"
shmerl Member since:

Rust is more flexible than Go, since it gives an option to manage memory when needed.

Reply Parent Score: 2