What’s Wrong with OOP and FP

[Paulo Pinto]

On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 at 09:12:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 09:51:33 Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 at 08:39:06 UTC, logicchains 
>> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, 13 November 2013 at 07:55:59 UTC, Froglegs 
>> > wrote:
>> >> Go is a boring language, kind of like Dart, I guess Google
>> >> just sucks at language design? The do use an awful lot of
>> >> Java, perhaps it has caused irreparable damage
>> > 
>> > If you were working in an Enterprise (TM) with coworkers who
>> > were potentially competence-challenged, would you want them
>> > having access to the power of D's compile time code 
>> > generation?
>> > Would you like to read and debug code that randomly
>> > intermingled D's different function call methods; having to
>> > determine whether foo.bar represents calling the bar method 
>> > of
>> > foo, calling the function bar with foo as an argument, or
>> > accessing the field bar on object foo?
>> 
>> Speaking from my enterprise seat, there are lots of 
>> "potentially
>> competence-challenged coworkers" in off-shore projects.
>> 
>> Maybe Google's target audience?
>
> This conversation definitely seems to be taking a turn for the 
> worse. Go was
> created by folks who believe in its goals and paradigms and 
> believed that they
> could better serve those by creating a new language than by 
> using existing
> ones. As I understand it, it was completely an 
> engineering-driven solution and
> not business-driven at all. Google really had very little to do 
> with its
> creation. It's just that the engineers who created it happened 
> to be working
> at Google. And while we may not like the direction that Go went 
> in, that
> doesn't mean that it's worthless or primarily intended to 
> prevent bad
> programmers from fouling things up. Clearly, it does a good 
> enough job that
> many programmers have taken a liking to it and written good, 
> useful programs
> in it.
>
> Personally, I have no interest in it and think that its 
> designers made some
> very poor choices, but that doesn't mean that we should be 
> making fun of it or
> make fun of Google for being the place where the engineers who 
> created it
> work. The fact that Google let its engineers spend company time 
> on creating a
> new programming langueg says very good things about Google, 
> even if the
> language itself ultimately isn't what we'd like.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Point taken. I should have thought better before posting. Just 
got carried away due to some of our project's status.

Sorry about that and my excuses to anyone that felt bad with my 
remark.

Despite my critic, I do see lots of use cases where Go might be 
useful and would happily used it over C, although D would be even 
better. :)

No more replies from me on this thread.

..
Paulo