Guess, I was looking for a way to politely disagree with your comment.
AFAIU you introduced 2 examples of not-so-clever programming languages for not-so-clever programmers. You gave 2 specific reasons as to why you consider these languages dumb (away with politeness, lol).
These 2 specific reasons look incorrect to me. It doesn't necessarily negate the whole point. But it certainly makes it somewhat questionable...
Well, my judgment regarding Go was based on what I saw and heard 10 years ago. Now it's all just impressions and opinions of other people. Java... too little, too late. Still not there.
I am not qualified to compare Go to the "smart languages" (Scala, Haskel, etc.). This is b/c I don't really know any smart languages. My reference points are Go, Python, C/C++. And Java to a lesser degree.
Go has honest closures, duck typing ("old Python" style), interesting (and very useful for the right sort of problems) concurrency features built into the language.
Admittedly subjective: minimalistic, orthogonal features, thoughtful standard library.
Anecdotally, it eats much less memory than JVM based languages. This last thing is at least partially due to Go being "value based language", C/C++ style. This is compare to Java, Python (and JavaScript?) that are "reference based languages". Also I could talk about Go being more "cache friendly" here... It is somewhat more on the implementation side of things not 100% language design though.
BTW if memory serves, Python closures are not "honest".
Specifically, you can read anything from the outer/enclosing scope but you cannot write to it unless you "cast some magic spell" (local or global keyword, I forgot).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Yes, I heard about Go types having parameters now. The fight in Java was hilarious.
no subject
AFAIU you introduced 2 examples of not-so-clever programming languages for not-so-clever programmers. You gave 2 specific reasons as to why you consider these languages dumb (away with politeness, lol).
These 2 specific reasons look incorrect to me. It doesn't necessarily negate the whole point. But it certainly makes it somewhat questionable...
no subject
Well, my judgment regarding Go was based on what I saw and heard 10 years ago. Now it's all just impressions and opinions of other people. Java... too little, too late. Still not there.
But I'd rather listen to your specific arguments.
no subject
Go has honest closures, duck typing ("old Python" style), interesting (and very useful for the right sort of problems) concurrency features built into the language.
Admittedly subjective: minimalistic, orthogonal features, thoughtful standard library.
Anecdotally, it eats much less memory than JVM based languages. This last thing is at least partially due to Go being "value based language", C/C++ style. This is compare to Java, Python (and JavaScript?) that are "reference based languages". Also I could talk about Go being more "cache friendly" here... It is somewhat more on the implementation side of things not 100% language design though.
no subject
Oh, then yes, between Python and Go, for production I'd definitely choose Go.
no subject
Specifically, you can read anything from the outer/enclosing scope but you cannot write to it unless you "cast some magic spell" (local or global keyword, I forgot).