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

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 3/29/15 4:43 AM, "Marc =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7x0eiI=?= <schuetzm at gmx.net>" 
wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 March 2015 at 08:37:54 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
>> On Saturday, 28 March 2015 at 18:47:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> On 3/28/2015 3:20 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>>>> Personally, I'm not sure that much is gained in pitting Go against D
>>>> precisely because they're so different that they're likely to appeal to
>>>> completely different sets of people.
>>>
>>> I also do not regard Go as a competitor to D. It's more of a
>>> competitor to Java and Ruby.
>>
>> How is Go a competitor to Ruby? I cannot think of a single parameter
>> where Go and Ruby don't take the exact opposite approach!(other than
>> the obvious ones like "both use require the programmer to write code")
>
> I think it's more of a competitor to Rails. Ruby as a language is as you
> say very different from Go. Incidentally, it shows that it is possible
> to make a language simple without crippling it.

... but efficiency. Ruby is 50 times slower than all languages, 
including itself.

Andrei