News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by Vendan on Saturday November 04, 2017 @02:10AM (#15624017)
Unless the C++ draft is 90+% stdlib, it's still quite a difference in size (printed, which would not be a good way to use it, the Go spec is 90 pages). And I'd consider it normative, though not to the point of "spec wins if the spec and the toolchain disagree".
Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by didibus on Saturday November 04, 2017 @02:40AM (#15624070)
I'm not sure Go has a spec. The page says spec, but the content says its the reference manual. So I'm guessing it's more focused on learning how to use the language then on writing an alternative implementation of it.
Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by crawshaw on Saturday November 04, 2017 @07:48AM (#15624617)
https://golang.org/ref/spec certainly is a specification of the Go language.

Whenever a difference is found between the two Go compilers, gccgo and gc, the spec is consulted to see which is right. If the spec is not clear on which compiler is right, then the spec is changed so it is.

When the third frontend was written (go/parser and go/types in the standard library), the spec played a similar role. Though far fewer changes were made to the spec, suggesting it is getting pretty good.

Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by didibus on Saturday November 04, 2017 @05:40PM (#15627043)
Oh, that's good to know. I'm happy to hear it is trying to be a language with a formal spec.
Re:Neugram – Scripting in Go by neild on Saturday November 04, 2017 @02:40AM (#15624068)
If the spec and an implementation disagree, there is a bug in one or the other. (There are multiple implementations of the language.) The Go spec is not entirely normative in that a disagreement between it and the implementation may be resolved in favor of the later. It is normative in that you should be able to implement the entire language from the spec alone.