Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Go in Go

talks.golang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 156 posts

Re: Go in Go

#101

Post by geon »

sagichmal wrote: post #92
pbreit wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't work on iPhone which is annoying.

It works fine on an iPhone. Tap the left or right side of the slide to go back or forward, respectively.

I have to hold the screen in landscape to not get the sides of the slides cropped off, and then I still get the address bar covering the headline after each new slide load, unless I tilt the phone to portrait and back for each slide.

Horrible.

Re: Go in Go

#103

Post by 72deluxe »

ExpiredLink wrote: post #66
microtonal wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bjarne Stroustrup Wasn't CFront written in C++?[1] (Of course, the initial version of C with classes was probably written in C.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cfront

Probably the only C++ program he ever wrote.

Bjarne has written numerous C++ programs, has he not?

Re: Go in Go

#104

Post by eternalban »

fizixer wrote: post #47

Fun fact: what's common between Rob Pike, Bjarne Stroustrup, Larry Wall, Guido van Rossum, and so many other language inventors? They're all C programmers!

C programmers?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Kay

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Ichbiah

...

Re: Go in Go

#105

Post by insertnickname »

Kurtz79 wrote: post #68

Unless I missed it, it is surprising the lack of benchmarks or mentioning how compile speed compares with the previous iteration. I'm not saying it would be necessary slower than a compiler written in C, if they wrote the more critical parts in assembler, but you would think compiling speed would be one of the outstanding discussion points, after a major rewrite.

There was some discussion about it on golang-dev:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-dev/6obxRcm-rqc...

Re: Go in Go

#107

Post by Zikes »

haberman wrote: post #106

There is no slide about writing the GC in Go. How do you write a GC in a GC'd language?

Slide #9 mentions they use the unsafe package in the GC to deal with pointers as raw bits.

Re: Go in Go

#108

Post by ihaveajob »

fizixer wrote: post #47

Fun fact: what's common between Rob Pike, Bjarne Stroustrup, Larry Wall, Guido van Rossum, and so many other language inventors? They're all C programmers!

They have a beard?

Re: Go in Go

#109

Post by boomlinde »

jballanc wrote: post #75
fizixer wrote: post #47

Fun fact: what's common between Rob Pike, Bjarne Stroustrup, Larry Wall, Guido van Rossum, and so many other language inventors? They're all C programmers!

Well, C is essentially "portable assembly", so it's to be expected...

I never understood this sentiment. C isn't assembly exactly because there isn't necessarily a direct correlation between the instructions the programmer writes and the resulting machine code. To me, this is as contrived as the idea that Javascript is "LISP in Java's clothing"

In what possible sense can it be described as an assembler?

Re: Go in Go

#110

Post by nemothekid »

boomlinde wrote: post #109
jballanc wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, C is essentially "portable assembly", so it's to be expected...

I never understood this sentiment. C isn't assembly exactly because there isn't necessarily a direct correlation between the instructions the programmer writes and the resulting machine code. To me, this is as contrived as the idea that Javascript is "LISP in Java's clothing" In what possible sense can it be described as an assembler?

>because there isn't necessarily a direct correlation between the instructions the programmer writes and the resulting machine code

If there was, then it wouldn't be "portable"

Post reply on HN