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

Go is Google's language, not ours

utcc.utoronto.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 679 posts

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#301

Post by mieseratte »

akerro wrote: post #186
danielmg wrote: post #177

For what it's worth I'm a semi-grey beard (20 years in) and I love golang. For me it was like going back to being 8 years old on my Commodore Plus/4 and really enjoying writing code again. It needs close parenting. Java has been ruined by the push to include everyone's pet feature.

>everyone's pet feature Isn't that C#? Java is very slow at adding new features, Java has only things that were proved to work in other languages.

> It needs close parenting. Java has been ruined by the push to include everyone's pet feature.

Oracle is moving to a faster cycle of development. There are some of us who strongly feel that some of their decisions are based less on what's best for the language and more on catering to the popular-and-loud crowd. I'll never forgive the addition of `var` to the language.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#302

Post by pjmlp »

glangdale wrote: post #280
sgift wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Java has made a U-turn in adding streams and related functional features on top of a language that used to be strongly for OOP (actually defining the meaning of OOP for a generation of developers.) So, by adding a feature which works extremely well with OO and enhances the language they have no soul? That doesn't make any sense. Javas soul is being a blue collar language. It leaves the experiments to other (JVM) la…

"Java, from Bell Labs"

That was Limbo actually, so it goes well with Go.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#303

Post by cosmodisk »

This is a difficult one. On one side we have a massive corp that is pushing it's own language and essentially steering it the way it wants.On the other, there's ever growing community that has its own ideas and suggestions on how the language should evolve. I'm too early in my journey woth Go to be able to have in-depth discussions on its functionality, however what I don't want to see it turning into another JavaScript,which is such a mess and free ride for everyone who thinks they have another good idea how to fix it.Unless there's a proper independent steering committee,I can't see this working too well without Google's ownership.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#304

Post by pjmlp »

fnord77 wrote: post #253
danielmg wrote: post #177

For what it's worth I'm a semi-grey beard (20 years in) and I love golang. For me it was like going back to being 8 years old on my Commodore Plus/4 and really enjoying writing code again. It needs close parenting. Java has been ruined by the push to include everyone's pet feature.

semi-grey beard here, too. Disagree about Java - it is stagnating because it hasn't kept pace with language innovation.

Aka catching up with Common Lisp and Standard ML.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#305

Post by pjmlp »

cryptos wrote: post #210
fnord123 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The top 10 according to Red Monk[1] are JavaScript, Java, Python, PHP, C#, C++, CSS, Ruby, C, Objective-C, Swift, TypeScript, Scala, Shell, Go, R, PowerShell, Perl, Haskell, Kotlin. Of these, Javascript (w3), Python (Python Foundation), CSS (w3), C++ (ISO), Ruby (community), C (ISO), Shell (Posix), R (community), Perl (community), and Haskell (community) are not bound to a single company. [1] https://redmonk.com/sogr…

Kotlin is also no longer in the hands of a single company. https://kotlinfoundation.org/

Most people there are JetBrains and Google employees.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#306

Post by steveklabnik »

jandem wrote: post #272
p0nce wrote: post #183

This is the same thing with Rust, where original core team are Mozilla's employees.

Many (most?) people on Rust's Core/Governance Teams don't work for Mozilla (anymore). See https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/core

(3 out of 9 people are Mozilla employees)

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#307

Post by 0815test »

logimame wrote: post #295
72deluxe wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure - I thought it got significantly better with C++11/14? Admittedly it also became rather more complicated, but the changes were generally for the best I thought?

From my five years of learning and using C++, I still have no clear picture how move semantics and rvalue references work. (I “kinda” get it, but am not confident about it). It seemed more and more convoluted every time I tried to study about it. The complexity created by implicit and explicit copy/move constructors is just insanity for me...

> From my five years of learning and using C++, I still have no clear picture how move semantics and rvalue references work. ... The complexity created by implicit and explicit copy/move constructors is just insanity for me...

This is the best argument for move from C++ to Rust instead. No "move constructors" whatsoever, move semantics are the default and are always performed via a trivial memcpy. There are explicit .clone() operations, like in some other languages, or the move construct can implicitly copy when the type is a POD-equivalent that makes this possible (identified by the Copy "trait"). Very simple, and nothing like the whole C++ move mess.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#308

Post by mxschumacher »

fnord123 wrote: post #201
ksec wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we look at the Top 10 programming languages, I think only Ruby is community driven that has very little cooperate backing. All the other languages are driven by one (Apple;Swift), or multiple, (Javascript, Java) cooperate sponsors. I think the balance is hard, you will need lots of resources from Documentation, VM expertise, Library, etc.

The top 10 according to Red Monk[1] are JavaScript, Java, Python, PHP, C#, C++, CSS, Ruby, C, Objective-C, Swift, TypeScript, Scala, Shell, Go, R, PowerShell, Perl, Haskell, Kotlin. Of these, Javascript (w3), Python (Python Foundation), CSS (w3), C++ (ISO), Ruby (community), C (ISO), Shell (Posix), R (community), Perl (community), and Haskell (community) are not bound to a single company. [1] https://redmonk.com/sogr…

The JS standard is not worked on my w3, but by Ecma international https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#309

Post by pjmlp »

jussij wrote: post #278
cryptos wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This could be done, of course. But how likely is such an approach to succeed? It would effectively create a new language and in turn to a new ecosystem. Why not just use a different language (Rust comes to mind) then?

> It would effectively create a new language and in turn to a new ecosystem. And that new language would be Go++ (i.e. Go with generics) and what would be wrong with that? Consider how C++ started. It was nothing more than a preprocessor extension to the C language called C with classes . There is nothing stopping that Go++ turning into the Go equivalent of C++. So back to the previous OPs question, what's stopping s…

Because after his experience being forced to drop into BCPL from Simula, Bjarne sweared not to do it ever again.

So when tasked to write his distributed network application in C at Bell Labs, his first step was to build something that would bring his Simula back, instead of bare bones C.

Re: Go is Google's language, not ours

#310

Post by thechao »

akerro wrote: post #286
th3iedkid wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generics was introduced in Java in 2004 with J2SE 5.0[0]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history#J2SE_5.0

Generics were added so late because they had to figure out how to do it properly, correctly, on the first time.

Generics in Java are giant hack from the early 2000’s to maintain backwards compatibility with 1990’s-vintage JVMs. C#’s generics we’re done right.
Post reply on HN