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

[via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 29 March 2015 at 19:03:06 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 March 2015 at 15:34:35 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> wrote:
>> Actually, there is quite a large overlap if you look beyond 
>> the syntax. Dart is completely unexciting, but I also find it 
>> very productive when used with the IDE.
>
> Glad to hear this - I haven't yet got very far with Dart, but 
> it seems like a toss-up between Dart and Livescript for a 
> passable language to run on the client (for my little use case).

I don't know the future of Dart, but if you have time to wait for 
it you might consider atscript/Angular 2.0.

> Knuth is also right that people think in different ways, and 
> it's an entirely natural thing to see a multiplicity of 
> languages emerging that are adapted to these different ways 
> (and of course the particular challenges people face are also 
> different).  That's why religious wars about these things have

I think most imperative languages are just variations over the 
same theme. I pick them based on what they+ecosystem is good at, 
not the language by itself. So basically, you have to be best at 
one particular application area to do well. Go is aiming to have 
a good runtime for building smaller web-services, and they are 
getting there. Because they focus.