Google definitely biased…

[Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 12:34:30 UTC, Chris wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 11:03:41 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 at 10:03:35 UTC, Chris wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 12 August 2014 at 16:43:18 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>>>>> If Google dropped Go tomorrow, there would be immediate 
>>>>>> backing for new
>>>>>> management of a fork.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, and we would have Go+, GNUGo, FreeGo (discontinued) 
>>>>> and whatnot, each having a different philosophy. There 
>>>>> would be flame wars on the internet and nobody would know 
>>>>> which kind of Go to use.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just like any open language implementation out there.
>>>>
>>>> CRuby vs JRuby vs RubyMotion vs ...
>>>> CPython vs Jython vs ...
>>>> Clang vs gcc vs msvc vs icc vs aC++ vs xlc vs ....
>>>>
>>>> Or for that matter
>>>>
>>>> Dmd vs ldc vs gdc
>>>
>>> Which is not what I meant. For Python and C etc there is 
>>> still one reference implementation of the language, 
>>> regardless of compilers or additional frameworks. What I 
>>> meant were different _implementations_ of the language with 
>>> different features and libraries, like Phobos and Tango (back 
>>> in the day). That might happen to Go, if Google let it, well, 
>>> go.
>>
>> There isn't such a thing as one reference implementation for 
>> C, given the amount of undefined and unspecified behavior in 
>> the standard.
>>
>> To the point many C developers mistakenly take their compiler 
>> behavior, and extensions, as what to expect from the standard.
>>
>> --
>> Paulo
>
> But you can start to program in standard C99 and be sure that 
> in 99% of all cases it will compile and work. Same goes for 
> Python and PHP etc. Remember Phobos vs. Tango? This must have 
> put a lot of people off back then.

Yeah, I admit I am trolling a little bit. :)

--
Paulo