On 2/11/17 5:04 AM, bachmeier wrote:
On Friday, 10 February 2017 at 23:02:38 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
Go - they value simplicity and robust run-time (Go's GC breaks news
with sub-milisecond pauses on large heaps). The sheer complexity of D
is enough for it to be a hard sell, D's GC is coup de grace.

I have never understood the appeal of Go. With respect to the GC,
there's this:
https://blog.plan99.net/modern-garbage-collection-911ef4f8bd8e#.o6pxesvuw


Has nothing new to say, yes GO's GC fragments heap, is slower at allocation and adds "read/write barriers from hell". But it does optimize for short pauses, which in turn avoids ugly spikes in server workloads and that is priceless. I have had the pleasure of trying to "tune away" the GC spikes of Java cluster software - it's not pleasant.


With respect to "simplicity", I found it to be easy to learn a language
that makes it hard to get stuff done. I've never understood the argument
that programming in Go is simple. Clearly others have their own view.

I agree with your view on this one. Go puts both advanced and novice programmers on the same ground - both have to write dumb code with little to no abstraction. In my limited time with Go I found it futile to abstract away even the most trivial patterns such as map-reduce with concurrency.

---
Dmitry Olshansky

Reply via email to