11–20 of 102 posts
There will be some crossover since Go's AOT compilation and low latency pause times will make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
>> make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go. like "micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines"? I highly doubt it! Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go. like "micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines"? I highly doubt it! Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now).
Yup, like the post about Discord processing images from yesterday underscored. If you need top tier performance you're going to have to reach for a language like Rust, C or C++ because without discrete control over your allocations and memory placement you will have something slower. C# is about the closest thing these days thanks to value types but even then Unity had to drop down to C++ to really get the performanc…
"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
They forgot the mindshare of PHP users. The tradeoffs Go makes are rather similar (simplicity, ease of deployment vs expressivenes and consistency).
There will be some crossover since Go's AOT compilation and low latency pause times will make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go.
>> make some things that needed to be done in C++ or Rust viable in Go. like "micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines"? I highly doubt it! Swift 5+ might have a chance but Go has none(as it is now).
"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
I am not sure if many programmers are "prepared to accept more complex syntax" (etc.) than those of C++...
"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
I develop in both Go and Rust.
I use Go as main replacement for .NET/Java web tier...no need for install specific Java or .NET run-time library.
I use Rust when there's heavy disk reads and writes...and I know it's a nightly job which should never segfault and never finish the execution since it crashed.
GO = useful for rapid prototyping and a good .NET/JAVA middle-tier replacement.
RUST = you CARE about performance.
You can use both with FFI/C - use Go as the carrier and use RUST where the functions should squeeze every bit of performance to do something...
"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
Curious, what are the "high deployment costs of JVM based languages"? Don't must standard workloads simply deploy a jar?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They forgot the mindshare of PHP users. The tradeoffs Go makes are rather similar (simplicity, ease of deployment vs expressivenes and consistency).
I saw a tweetstorm by a longtime Go user who listed all the flaws and inconsistencies of the language. In the end it didn't look much better than PHP to me. Which is surprising, since PHP is a "grown" language and go has been "designed" by some longtime languages pros.
Though I guess the same applies to PHP.
It's a lot nicer to write webapps in Go though since you have control over global state and not the per-request state of PHP, which makes for some easier solutions to problems (work-queues are easy to implement/use on the server-side unlike in PHP)
Also the stricter type system compared to PHP is nice in addition to static linking making it more portable than PHP (minus not being portable to shared hosters)
"Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines. Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and N…
I am not sure if many programmers are "prepared to accept more complex syntax" (etc.) than those of C++...