Gary Willoughby: "Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers"

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 18:39:34 +0000, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:

>> yet current CPUs are still the same as 50 years before, that is the
>> problem. ;-)
> 
> I'd suggest that a Intel x86_64 of 2015 bears only a passing
> relationship to an IBM 360 of the 1960s.

but core principles are still there. it's implementation that is changed, 
not high-level design.

> With all the transistors available per mm² these days, it is about time
> we investigated alternate, implicitly parallel ways of working.
> Intel had a go a few years ago with various alternative dataflow based
> architectures, but they were told by the software people that they had
> no future because software inertia was more important than innovation.

yes. "computers" are huge industry now, and industry resists to 
innovations that requires industry players to change their processes.

on the other side of the spectrum was Chuck Moore, for example, who 
imagines modern computers filled with many cheap and average RISC 
processors, and using parallel multiprocessor execution to achieve great 
performance.

and people with expirience on 8-bit Atari, NES or C64 knows by their 
hearts that having specialized processors can greatly help (and it's a 
great PITA too ;-).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d-announce/attachments/20150329/78bb0a6f/attachment.sig>