Re:Go: What We Got Right, What We Got Wrong
by sevagh on Thursday January 04, 2024 @10:14PM
(#38875285)
From the same team that came up with the unique, searchable, and identifiable word "Go" for a programming language.
Re:Go: What We Got Right, What We Got Wrong
by kragen on Friday January 05, 2024 @03:50AM
(#38877065)
rob pike's definition of 'systems software' from 02000 is in http://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/utah2000/utah2000.html
> Systems: Operating systems, networking, languages; the things that connect programs together. Software: As you expect. (...) What is Systems Research these days? Web caches, Web servers, file systems, network packet delays, all that stuff. Performance, peripherals, and applications, but not kernels or even user-level applications.
he goes into a lot more detail there on the things he sees in 'systems software research', and it goes pretty far beyond kernels and drivers. this is not a definition he retconned onto golang in 02014 or, i would claim, a definition unique to him
I remember that being a meme of sorts. Most people understood that as a C/C++ replacement with operating systems and drivers being written in Go. System programmers laughed, of course. Eventually when it didn't look like it wasn't going happen, the token reply from Go devs became "Well not those kind of systems, we always meant a different kind of systems programming language, not what you all thought".