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

[cym13 via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 29 March 2015 at 12:21:01 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 March 2015 at 02:15:38 UTC, cym13 wrote:
>> Moreover, it is possible to reach a good expressiveness (maybe 
>> not as good as python, but that's the whole goal of python so 
>> there's no shame in not matching it).
>
> There are many alternatives to Python. Like Nim or Dart:
>
> https://www.dartlang.org/articles/beyond-async/
> https://www.dartlang.org/articles/await-async/

Nim seems quite interesting indeed, even if I'm not sure how well 
it scales. It looks like a language that is prowd of a heavy use 
of macros and DSL definition à la lisp. I know lisp enough to 
know that it's not a problem in itself, but that it should be 
developed wisely. It may look at first as a better alternative 
than D for a pure python developer, but I'll stick with D.

However, I can't see a pythonista being excited in Dart at all, 
at least not for what he finds in python. More restricted in any 
way, no clear functional orientation possible, a clear lack of 
expressiveness... D clearely has the advantage there.