> It's almost like you don't realize that Java came out a decade before Go
This might be a more compelling argument if Go didn't ignore (more than) the last decade of PL research.
Research, sure, but it doesn't ignore the last decade of practical experience writing programs. A programming language is a user interface. The theory isn't all that matters.
Re:Rob Pike: Go at Google
by drivebyacct2 on Sunday October 28, 2012 @01:55AM
(#4708276)
And yet I'm writing tons of code in it very quickly. I don't know how it missed HN, but Go also now powers Google's download infrastructure (Chrome, etc)
Re:Rob Pike: Go at Google
by drivebyacct2 on Sunday October 28, 2012 @01:44PM
(#4709464)
another case in point: http://www.txt.io/t-2kv5h
I feel like people don't bother to read about Go before trashing it for things that Go has never, ever claimed to be.
It's almost like you don't realize that Java came out a decade before Go, or that you don't understand the power of Goroutines or the power of writing your own low-level concurrent code.
I'd hate for you to find out that java's concurrency primitives are probably implemented using the same constructs as goroutines and/or are available to devs in the sync package. (Feel free to write "thread"-safe data structures. Hell, if you'd wanted to complain about the lack of generics in that case, I'd have even joined you.)