41–50 of 241 posts
Python doesn't enforce any parenthesis in those statements, so how were you using them in Python that changes how you'd do the same thing in Go?
Here's a summary of the article: * author cannot write portable C sockets code * author cannot handle C/C++ * author believes his app would be too slow in Python, later abandons App, but retains his bias against Python * Go has no parens for if/for * Go has unicode support * Go has closures "like salt shakers" * Go is cohesively designed * Go has nice libraries Go may or may not be a good language, but this kind of a…
The author needs no age defense. He makes a ton of valid points for why you should try out Go.
I have'nt managed enough time yet to familiarize myself with Go, but the little that I have glanced at, it seems a nice enough language for scientific computation. The syntax and semantics of arrays are nice and binding to C is purportedly simple. Ease of binding with Fortran would have been nice too. So I find it a bit strange that I never hear of Go in the context of array based computation, that is the stuff peopl…
I think the primary reason for the lack of users has been language stability. The Go team are currently working on the first actual "release" of the language ("Go 1") to address this. But prior to the move towards Go 1, the language was very much in flux, more so than you'd want for a language (that you'll actively be maintaining code in) to be. (And gofix, while nice, isn't really a substitute for language and standard library stability).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I usually wouldn't respond to mean comments, but, this one really throws me off (I'm the OP). There is a very strong difference between "cannot write" and the need for something to be simple. I can definitely handle C/C++, and I don't think writing something in a higher-level language changes that. If something is doing processing with 4000 threads with around 10 years worth of by-the-minute data, it sure as hell wil…
Are you processing data using 4000 threads? Do you have access to a cluster? Otherwise it seems counter-productive. BTW, Python has great facilities (IPython.parallel) for doing parallel and distributed computing. It is also pretty good at number crunching using Numpy.
> The first thing I immediately noticed is that they got rid of the parentheses in "if" and "for" statements. Coming from Python, I really like this. Python doesn't enforce any parenthesis in those statements, so how were you using them in Python that changes how you'd do the same thing in Go?
> The first thing I immediately noticed is that they got rid of the parentheses in "if" and "for" statements. Coming from Python, I really like this. Python doesn't enforce any parenthesis in those statements, so how were you using them in Python that changes how you'd do the same thing in Go?
Is there currently a good web framework for Go? Edit: web.go looks pretty sweet: http://www.getwebgo.com/ Edit2: As does app.go: https://github.com/georgenava/appgo ...There's a large list of Go projects here: http://godashboard.appspot.com/project
I've used web.go successfully before; its quite nice.
I have'nt managed enough time yet to familiarize myself with Go, but the little that I have glanced at, it seems a nice enough language for scientific computation. The syntax and semantics of arrays are nice and binding to C is purportedly simple. Ease of binding with Fortran would have been nice too. So I find it a bit strange that I never hear of Go in the context of array based computation, that is the stuff peopl…
Thus far you barely hear of anyone using Go in any context, though that is changing. I think the primary reason for the lack of users has been language stability. The Go team are currently working on the first actual "release" of the language ("Go 1") to address this. But prior to the move towards Go 1, the language was very much in flux, more so than you'd want for a language (that you'll actively be maintaining cod…
> The first thing I immediately noticed is that they got rid of the parentheses in "if" and "for" statements. Coming from Python, I really like this. Python doesn't enforce any parenthesis in those statements, so how were you using them in Python that changes how you'd do the same thing in Go?
I assume he likes it because it doesn't change anything. He's used to the Python way.
Here's a summary of the article: * author cannot write portable C sockets code * author cannot handle C/C++ * author believes his app would be too slow in Python, later abandons App, but retains his bias against Python * Go has no parens for if/for * Go has unicode support * Go has closures "like salt shakers" * Go is cohesively designed * Go has nice libraries Go may or may not be a good language, but this kind of a…
I usually wouldn't respond to mean comments, but, this one really throws me off (I'm the OP). There is a very strong difference between "cannot write" and the need for something to be simple. I can definitely handle C/C++, and I don't think writing something in a higher-level language changes that. If something is doing processing with 4000 threads with around 10 years worth of by-the-minute data, it sure as hell wil…
But your arguments for Go rang hollow. I'd urge you to go through the "pro-Go" arguments point by point and describe why, say, they apply to Go but not to Python 3.0. And I'm not a Python zealot by any means; I mention it as a comparison point mostly because it's very commonly used.
There are undoubtedly lots of great reasons to use Go, but your article did not enunciate them in a way that would win people over.