Re:Go: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
by mfer on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:56AM
(#16831208)
One of the changes no one seems to be talking about is in leadership. Rob, Robert, and Ken would agree on a feature going into Go before it did. Now Russ Cox is in sole control of the leadership. This is happening at a point when work such as Go 2 and vgo are happening.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
> Now Russ Cox is in sole control of the leadership.
What makes you think that? As far as I can see, Rob, Ian, Brad, Andrew and many others are still in the decision loop.
Re:Go: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
by frankietwenty9 on Friday April 13, 2018 @12:39PM
(#16831604)
I think one of the reasons Go is so good at being simple (relatively) - is that each feature required no other option available in order to make it into the language. I forget the article I read this from, so I may have the semantics slightly off.
With just rsc we lose a little of this. There are many other incredibly talented engineers involved such as Ian Lance Taylor. I'm interested if this philosophy will still be important in the future.
Re:Go: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
by brianolson on Friday April 13, 2018 @12:36PM
(#16831583)
Where is the discussion of Go 2.0 happening? Are they still shutting down discussion of features they don't want to hear about like they did through all the Go 1.* years?