Go: A new system programing language

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

grauzone wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> grauzone wrote:
>>> Daniel de Kok wrote:
>>>> But hey, there is a compiler for 64-bit binaries :). Of course, I 
>>>> should swallow that, and help with the LDC efforts...
>>>
>>> As far as I know, ldc+Tango already works on 64 bit. Also, Go has no 
>>> Windows compiler, which is an _absolute_ show stopper.
>>
>> Yeah, but that's something that can be fixed. What is more difficult to 
> 
> Don't underestimate the negative effects of a bad toolchain. D has the 
> same problem, but (apparently) not as bad.
> 
>> fix is that Go is all-over an unremarkable and unoriginal language 
>> (something that would become obvious if one thinks for a second what 
>> would have happened if Go wasn't associated with Google's brand name). 
>> On the other hand, it is associated with Google's brand name. :o) It 
>> will be interesting to see how things turn out.
> 
> I agree, the brand name is probably the best what Go got. (But it's not 
> that Go doesn't contain some good ideas.)

Well I'm not sure. I haven't seen anything original in Go, just 
regurgitations of prior approaches. Of course, there may be value in 
finding the right mix of herbs, but right now the soup is rather long*.

Andrei

* "long soup" = Romanian phrase for a soup rich in water but lacking in 
all other ingredients.