Google's Go

grauzone none at example.net
Sat Jan 23 23:28:50 PST 2010


Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 12:00:04PM -0500, Steve Teale wrote:
>> I see that Go has now usurped D's former place at #13 in Tiobe - which I realize of course does not mean anything. But I'd be interested to hear what the D aficionados think of Go.
> 
> There's been a couple threads about it before. My opinion: it is garbage.
> It has maybe two or three good ideas in there, but on the whole, it is
> a very poor showing. The arrogant developers didn't do any research into
> prior art when designing it, and it shows - good ideas are absent without
> even a mention. Bad ideas remain in there saying "this is the best we could
> do".

Oh well, D isn't that great either. While it doesn't have such big names 
attached on it (although "Andrei" is not that small of a name), it had 
more time.

What worries one most is how D rushes "to completion", just because of 
the deadline of that one book. It's obvious that some features are half 
cooked at best. Just look at the features added in D 2.038 (auto ref, 
DIP2): terrible hacks to get some broken language features barely to 
work before the deadline is over.

Also notice how the compiler, after all these years, still chokes up on 
basic language features. The struggling of the QtD developers is a major 
sign for this. I wonder what the heck is wrong with dmd's internal 
design that the situation is that bad. I mean, Walter could get a 
freaking C++ compiler right, why not the compiler for his own language?

/rant

> The only reason it gets any attention at all is because of the names attached
> to it.
> 



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list