On Thursday, 21 November 2013 at 11:07:15 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 21 November 2013 at 09:57:35 UTC, Bienlein wrote:
On Thursday, 21 November 2013 at 09:33:04 UTC, Bienlein wrote:
What puzzles me is the enormous activity in the Go forum. Only
the Python forum has that much traffic. It seems to me that
people are all that happy if they have a language with which
they
can just start hacking around on something.
That is because Go doesn't force anyone to think about design.
The only design-level construct it has is the class an that's
it.
Embedding is truly only to save coding effort not having to
type
in dereferenciation chains as in C. There is nothing except
classes, but no inheritance, traits, mixins, overriding, etc.
So
there is nothing that forces you to think about your design in
Go. And you don't have to know about manual memory management
as
in Rust.
-- Bienlein
I forgot to say that I really don't know what this will end up
in
...
I'm wary of languages that are hyped by big companies or the
web programming community. First there was Java which is still
getting face lifts and plastic surgery. Then there was Ruby,
"the way to go", but it hasn't convinced me yet. If all these
languages are "soooo good", why do people still feel the need
to come up with new solutions (cf. all the new languages for
the JVM)? The answer is probably "tunnel vision" design and
development. The language designers offer one ideology and
users don't have to think when designing their programs. Simple
as that. If you have a big company to back this up, people will
think "it's THE ultimate best ever" language. Personally, I
enjoy the freedom of D programming, even though with this
freedom come tough questions as to the design of the program.
You mean like C and C++ were by AT&T? Or FORTRAN and PL/I/M by
IBM?
Java was not the first one.
Languages need a corporate sponsor or a killer framework to gain
market share.
Luckily we can now point to Facebook as possible corporate
sponsor.
--
Paulo
