Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy

Re:Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy by Gibbon1 on Monday November 27, 2023 @01:09PM (#38435809)

I feel like the pointer stuff you could handle safely in a modern language. Because I think pointer and array notation are convertible so one isn't scarier than the other.

But yeah not being able to tag pointers as 'can't be null' and have the compiler enforce that ignores everything we've learned in the last 40 years. You shouldn't be able to pass a potentially null pointer to a routine that can't deal with it. You end up with code finding a null pointer without any context that tells it what to do with that. Or it panics.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy by madeofpalk on Monday November 27, 2023 @01:24PM (#38436040)

Using pointers just to get a 'null' is just an annoying hack reflective of poor design. Instead, "no value" should be able to be directly represented.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy by Cthulhu_ on Thursday November 30, 2023 @09:45AM (#38474116)

In Go that's the zero value, which is usually things like empty string, 0, [], etc; in most cases that's good enough.

[ Parent | on HN ]