Having worked on the Go port for SPARC with another person (don't know if it was ever completed), I have to agree with the parent here. The implementation of Go itself (based on 1.5-1.8 when I worked on it) was actually very complex. Large swaths of the codebase were completely uncommented and much of the knowledge about how the system is intended to work resides in the heads of the core Go team.
If only y’all could have just used llvm
Yes, because we all enjoy waiting for a compiler to get its work done, while keeping the myth alive that either C or C++ are required to write compilers.
> Google's developer marketing Like Google did marketing for Dart and it picked up?
Dart lost the support from Chrome team, it was rescued by AdWords team and Flutter is trying to make it relevant, but given Android team answers, it is clear that a power struggle is going on across teams. Giliad is also a personality from language research hardly known by UNIX fans.
Seems like time killed the adoption of Dart into Chrome.
The chrome team had "been wanting to fix Webkit for a very long time, and the Blink fork made that possible"
Moving Blink from ref counting to a traced GC was part of that fix, it also was required to be completed to allow the Dart VM to be added to chrome. What was supposed to take months took years and with no end in sight the Dart team announced that its VM would not ship with chrome.
Dart lost the support from Chrome team, it was rescued by AdWords team and Flutter is trying to make it relevant, but given Android team answers, it is clear that a power struggle is going on across teams. Giliad is also a personality from language research hardly known by UNIX fans.
Seems like time killed the adoption of Dart into Chrome. The chrome team had "been wanting to fix Webkit for a very long time, and the Blink fork made that possible" Moving Blink from ref counting to a traced GC was part of that fix, it also was required to be completed to allow the Dart VM to be added to chrome. What was supposed to take months took years and with no end in sight the Dart team announced that its VM…
Like a standard library that doesn't even have a max function for integers, or a set type?
It is trivial to write both of these on your own, why do we need unnecessary abstraction for such a simple task.
That's the ethos of Go. The standard library can be poor and woefully incomplete because hey it's easy to reinvent the wheel. And then instead of composing functions (say, a reduce function applied to max to find the max of a sequence), users just end up rewriting everything because it's trivial.
For what it's worth, LLVM would have made precise moving GC hard. (Though Go 6g/8g still doesn't have moving GC, which is unfortunate.) For that reason, I'm not certain that LLVM would have been the best decision in the long term, though it would have made Go code faster in the short term. In my view, if Cranelift had been around when Go was announced, it would have been the clear best choice over LLVM, due to compil…
> In my view, if Cranelift had been around when Go was announced
Too bad cranelift is written in a language which wasn't even invented when Go was announced ^^.
I write primarily in Go, I have to admit that I can't stand the name of it. When doing a search I constantly have to write "go golang" in my searches to get relevant results. It's too generically named, like naming something "The"
Seems like time killed the adoption of Dart into Chrome. The chrome team had "been wanting to fix Webkit for a very long time, and the Blink fork made that possible" Moving Blink from ref counting to a traced GC was part of that fix, it also was required to be completed to allow the Dart VM to be added to chrome. What was supposed to take months took years and with no end in sight the Dart team announced that its VM…
And now they moved on into https://www.toitware.com/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPna6D21Eqg
Thanks, have been looking for an update on toitware, had only found a 15 minute video in English by Kasper.
With Dart going down the flutter path, work on the dart iot project, dartino stop. Thanks again, just starting to watch the video now.
But then to be fair, they also talk about Kotlin and other languages..
Which they also market, so?
The parent seemed to think they gave Go an unfair advantage by marketing it at Google IO. My point being that I don't think it's an unfair advantage as they mention non-google langs as well.
It's possible that a huge marketing advantage kept people interested long enough to come to appreciate the benefits of the langauge's basic nature.
I see very little marketing for Go. Compare, for example, to C# when in came out, or Java when it did.
The marketing advantage is largely from being associated with Google and Pike and Thompson. That's a good way to get the world to spread the word for free.
Yes, I always find it surprising that people evaluate languages on the sheer number of features. As though the hallmark of a good language is having lots of complexity.
Because, the complexity doesn't go away, gets dumped into developers that keep re-writing boilerplate libraries that kind of compensate for the lacking features. It happens all the time. Language gets introduced at the sound of simplicity trumpet, tons of boilerplate libraries eventually appear, then if the language manages to make it in the mainstream, half baked features get introduced 'cause backwards compatibilit…
Well, boilerplate is a nuisance, but it is cheap. It’s not generally where your bugs are coming from (and certainly not your most insidious bugs)—they come from your complexity, especially your incidental complexity. In exchange, Go is a very easy language to learn, which is an important property for software development teams—you don’t need to restrict your hiring pool to candidates with experience in $language; you can train anyone to productivity in _days_. This is actual cost savings over a nebulous idea that boilerplate is evil. Anyway, Go needs generics and sum types and those two features get rid of 99% of boilerplate and still keep it below an order of magnitude of the complexity that you see in Java, C++, etc, so I don’t buy your argument that the extra features are a net positive value.