Article discussing Go, could well be D

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Nick Sabalausky" <a at a.a> wrote in message 
news:isojjt$1a8c$1 at digitalmars.com...
> "Andrei Alexandrescu" <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote in message 
> news:isnvfi$h9$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> On 6/8/11 3:29 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> "Lars T. Kyllingstad"<public at kyllingen.NOSPAMnet>  wrote in message
>>> news:isn5rr$134r$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/hudvd/
>>>> the_go_programming_language_or_why_all_clike/
>>>>
>>>> The author presents a "wish list" for his perfect systems programming
>>>> language, and claims that Go is the only one (somewhat) fulfilling it.
>>>> With the exception of item 7, the list could well be an advertisement 
>>>> for
>>>> D.
>>>>
>>>
>>> "Some of them enjoy a phase of hype, but then fade again, others stay in 
>>> the
>>> spheres of irrelevancy, while yet others will be ready for public
>>> consumption any decade now."
>>>
>>> ...With "stay in the spheres of irrelevancy" linking to the D homepage.
>>>
>>> That annoys the hell out of me. D matches his wishlist better than Issue 
>>> 9
>>> does, and it's dismissed for "irrelevency"? Heck, I could actually buy 
>>> that
>>> if there were any actual basis at all for saying such a thing. But what
>>> could even *possibly* be considered reasons for saying so? Is it
>>> "irrelevent" just because it doesn't have some corporation behind it? 
>>> That'd
>>> be some real broken reasoning. Is it "irrelevant" because it wasn't 
>>> created
>>> by some guy who did something significant 40 years ago and hasn't done a
>>> damn thing of note since? Hell, unless you're pretending it's 197x, 
>>> Andre's
>>> far more noteworthy than that Issue 9 guy. It sure as hell can't be
>>> "irrelevent" for lack of use. So what else could it be besides just 
>>> having
>>> his head up his ass? Not that I think his head's up there. From what I 
>>> read,
>>> I'm convinced the real reason is just that he's far too much a fan of ad
>>> hominem reasoning.
>>
>> You're complaining in the wrong place. What you need to do is answer on 
>> reddit.
>>
>
> What, and publically make D users look like jackasses that take things too 
> personally? :)
>

More seriously though, I've come close to commenting on reddit in the past. 
But then the signup form didn't work without JS, so then I turned JS on, and 
then it rejected mailinator, so instead of jumping through the hoop of 
setting up yet another throwaway address on my mail server (which I'm not 
actually opposed to doing), I always ended up deciding, "Meh, I don't 
actually care *that* much about posting my stupid little bullshit ramblings, 
I've got better things to do..."

But yea, maybe I will go ahead and just do it...(and then rephrase my 
comment about the article to be less contentious ;) ) Hell it's not like the 
rest of the article was all that bad (although I disagree with the "the more 
orthogonality, the better"). I did love this bit:

"The [Java] web services offer some really nice abstractions. Up until you 
look under the hood and discover a Rube Goldberg machine. Each layer builds 
upon last year's favourite abstraction layer."

'Course, he's only talking about Java, and only part of Java, but that would 
be a brilliant summary of the whole damn Web.