On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Kurt H Maier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 08:48:39PM +0530, Dan Cross wrote:
>> Wonderful! Please point me to your new programming language so I can
>> have a look?
>
> I don't think it would do you any good, since you are apparently unable
> to differentiate between programming languages and build systems.
Oh no, I can't. Please, by all means, point me to whatever it is that
you have produced that demonstrates your prowess in this area so that
I can learn more.
>> So are you saying that because they use bash to build the system, the
>> language is shitty? Or just the build system is shitty?
>
> I have other issues with Go as a language, but the build system is
> unmitigated shit.
Irrelevant.
>> Writing a shell script is easy. Writing a shell script to build a
>> non-trivial piece of software across $n$ different platforms is hard.
>
> And yet people do it all the time.
Irrelevant.
>> To put it another way, why not cut the cord? Because it takes time
>> away from doing something they consider more important.
>
> Incorrect. There's a whole world of people out there; some of them
> would be willing to build and maintain an elegant, portable shell
> script. That's the point of having an open development process, I
> thought. I understand the need for the core devs to focus on the task
> at hand: language building. It is idiotic not to delegate the build
> system to someone willing and able to devote the time to it.
Not the way that community is currently set up, so irrelevant.
>> More generally, if your impression of Go as a language ("Typical go
>> shit...") is based on what shell they chose for the build script, then
>> I'm not sure you have your priorities straight.
>
> Fortunately, your assessment of my priorities is meaningless. "Typical
> Go shit" referred to the ceaseless lack of focus on quality endemic to a
> schizophrenic community that was organized around a language without a
> mission. Go is still evolving in two separate directions; one camp sees
> it as yet another language for web shit, and one camp sees it as a real
> programming language for actual programs. I long ago lost interest in
> seeing who will eventually win, but in the meantime every bad decision
> seems to have some chorus of supporters who take every piece of
> criticism personally. *Those* are the people who need to examine their
> priorities.
And yet the produced the language, and people use it. But you clearly
know better, so please, by all means, show me what you've produced
that's useful that I can learn something from.
- Dan C.
