News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Go 1.3+ Compiler Overhaul by vanderZwan on Thursday December 19, 2013 @04:58AM (#6933745)
> Would you consider working in a clunkier programming language if you knew that it offered 10X more "refactorability" than the other languages you were considering?

I'd have a hard time believing that a more clunky language would be a more refactorable language.

Re:Go 1.3+ Compiler Overhaul by charlieflowers on Thursday December 19, 2013 @09:00AM (#6934643)
Ha ha, good point. Probably not. But take Lisp's homoiconicity as an example. Some people regard it as less desirable syntax, and yet even a subset of people who feel that way still find that the macro system makes it worth it.

So, would you accept certain trade-offs in your programming language if it greatly magnified the programmatic refactorability of your code?

Re:Go 1.3+ Compiler Overhaul by vanderZwan on Thursday December 19, 2013 @12:07PM (#6935941)
Well, in my case my projects are never that large - I'm just a designer who does small high-fidelity prototypes and lets people who are supposed to be more capable do the large scale implementations. So "being easy to make quick-and-dirty hack from scratch with" is more important for me.

Also, have you tried Julia? It's homoiconic but looks more like Python. Haven't seen any refactoring tools for it though.