[deleted]
C vs GO
81–90 of 184 posts
Re: C vs GO
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your C code looks very unidiomatic to me, but I guess that is relatively a matter of taste (still I don't understand why would somebody use C if they don't like to write code in the 'classic' C style as seen in the original Unix and Plan 9 source). That aside, in Go you can also do fixed allocations and manage your own memory pools to avoid the GC. And I would also question how many C programs require real-time behav…
>Your C code looks very unidiomatic to me, but I guess that is relatively a matter of taste (still I don't understand why would somebody use C if they don't like to write code in the 'classic' C style as seen in the original Unix and Plan 9 source). Because we learned a lot about writing more robust and maintainable software since the 1970s. Also the original Unix source code was one thing more than anything: small.…
>Because we learned a lot about writing more robust and maintainable software since the 1970s.
Plan 9 wasn't written in the 70s. OpenBSD is another example, probably a better example given that their sshd is far more important, and running on far more machines than anything you've ever written. So it seems rather disingenuous to suggest that the authors of such software are wrong for writing simple, concise, effective code instead of your bizarre vision of C.
Re: C vs GO
#83In my opinion, any new language today should be all beginner friendly, there are large pool of people who are interested and it means a great future of our world.
What kind of "beginner"? If you mean someone who has never programmed before, Go is much simpler to learn than C and makes a lot more sense. If you mean someone that is a programmer and hasn't used go before, I can tell you I went from "never having seen Go before" to "reasonably proficient" inside of two months. Further, my Go code is easier to read and maintain than anything I've done in other languages. (I came la…
Wow, that is very good. I am total beginner in coding so there is nothing much I could say but I am just saying from a total beginners perspective. What would be your suggestion for me if I am planning to build some social application? Learn C first to gain some fundamental knowledge? And because it is still the most widely used language, if I don't know it I wouldn't be able to find a work in the future?
Re: C vs GO
#84I guess I might be the only one to say this, but is this a joke? Some sort of prank? Not a single Go program is more readable, and I would argue that they are ALL less readable (and I like Go). I honestly can't tell if he is trolling or if he is serious.
I think Go's strengths over C really start to shine when you're writing programs longer than 100 lines. Not having an exception mechanism, interfaces, single namespace, no attaching methods to structs etc are fine in a small program, but they make bigger programs harder to digest pretty quickly.
Calling Go's panic/recover system a proper exception mechanism is quite a stretch.
Re: C vs GO
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Go's strengths over C really start to shine when you're writing programs longer than 100 lines. Not having an exception mechanism, interfaces, single namespace, no attaching methods to structs etc are fine in a small program, but they make bigger programs harder to digest pretty quickly.
Calling Go's panic/recover system a proper exception mechanism is quite a stretch.
I think he is referring more to go's "defer" functionality and out-of-band error return values more than panic/recover.
Re: C vs GO
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your C code looks very unidiomatic to me, but I guess that is relatively a matter of taste (still I don't understand why would somebody use C if they don't like to write code in the 'classic' C style as seen in the original Unix and Plan 9 source). That aside, in Go you can also do fixed allocations and manage your own memory pools to avoid the GC. And I would also question how many C programs require real-time behav…
>Your C code looks very unidiomatic to me, but I guess that is relatively a matter of taste (still I don't understand why would somebody use C if they don't like to write code in the 'classic' C style as seen in the original Unix and Plan 9 source). Because we learned a lot about writing more robust and maintainable software since the 1970s. Also the original Unix source code was one thing more than anything: small.…
> for example "private" member variables are way less private than incomplete C types
I'd be interested in hearing why you think this is the case: pretty much any method I'd use to get past compiler-enforced barriers protecting access a private variable in C++ is still usable in C to access data hidden away by an incomplete type.
What you say is valid for code that's written freshly. When you have to work with libraries whose first lines of code were written ages ago, you pretty much have no other option than to deal with toothache-inducing styles of C code.
Re: C vs GO
#87I guess I might be the only one to say this, but is this a joke? Some sort of prank? Not a single Go program is more readable, and I would argue that they are ALL less readable (and I like Go). I honestly can't tell if he is trolling or if he is serious.
He's not helping by explicitly stating that he's ignoring gofmt style. Those examples would look lengthier but cleaner if he would run gofmt on them.
Re: C vs GO
#88Go is the best worst language I've used. Most of what I do fits pretty much right in the sweet spot for go, network services and web development. Stuff I would have previously used C and (insert scripting language here) for respectively. Go fits into both of those areas really nicely, and I prefer it over C and scripting language X for these tasks.
But the problem is, I've already tried haskell, which also fits that same area, and is semantically a vastly better language. I just wish go had been more willing to push the envelope and at least try to be somewhat modern and useful instead of being "C with modules, but slow". On the other hand, haskell is a terrible language syntactically, and from a development environment perspective. Go is near enough to perfect in those regards. Having a fast compiler, a simple, working build system, a sane and easily enforced code format all make a huge practical difference. I wish I could use go, as it is much nicer than haskell from a usability perspective. But the language is just too primitive.
Re: C vs GO
#89Go is the best worst language I've used. Most of what I do fits pretty much right in the sweet spot for go, network services and web development. Stuff I would have previously used C and (insert scripting language here) for respectively. Go fits into both of those areas really nicely, and I prefer it over C and scripting language X for these tasks. But the problem is, I've already tried haskell, which also fits that…
What have you written in Go that you'd wished you'd written in Haskell?
Re: C vs GO
#90Go is the best worst language I've used. Most of what I do fits pretty much right in the sweet spot for go, network services and web development. Stuff I would have previously used C and (insert scripting language here) for respectively. Go fits into both of those areas really nicely, and I prefer it over C and scripting language X for these tasks. But the problem is, I've already tried haskell, which also fits that…
What have you written in Go that you'd wished you'd written in Haskell?
Everything, and the same in reverse. That's the problem. Using haskell, I wish I was using go because the downsides of haskell bother me. But when I am using go, I wish I was using haskell because the downsides of go bother me.