In <129a67e4-328c-42b9-9bf3-152f1b76f...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> Michele Simionato <michele.simion...@gmail.com> writes:
>It does not look so primitive to me, compared to commonly used >languages. >I am pretty sure that they are "missing a lot of the latest ideas" on >purpose. If they want to succeed and make Go a popular language in the >Google >infrastructure (ideally replacing C++) their selling point must be a >nearly zero >learning curve. Python succeded with the low learning curve idea. I >wish them >the best. Certainly it is time to replace C with something more >modern, be it Go >or some other language. The two goals of replacing C with "something more modern" and at the same time have a "nearly zero learning curve" seem to me mutually negating. The closer to zero the learning curve is, the closer to C/C++, and therefore the less modern, that language will be. The "dark matter" in this discussion Google's projected OS, Chrome. Will Go be to Chrome what C was/is to Unix? The close collaboration between Rob Pike and Ken Thompson in this project gives reason to think so. And if so, how has the design of Chrome shaped the design of Go? One more thing: I found Rob Pike's mutterings on generics (towards the end of his rollout video) rather offputting, because he gave the impression that some important aspects of the language were not even considered before major decisions for it were set in stone. It looks like, if they ever get around to supporting generics, it will be a late-in-the-day hack. kynn -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
