On Friday, 11 July 2014 at 16:54:40 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Friday, 11 July 2014 at 16:22:27 UTC, Russel Winder via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, 2014-07-11 at 15:30 +0000, Chris via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
Let's not forget that Go has millions and billions of dollars
behind it and that it is inevitable that the whole internet
will be full of zealots and professional posters who promote
Go as "theeee best thing ever". People. Sheep. Meehhh.
(I think I detect unintended irony in this post :-)
I get the point :-)
Go, via goroutines, promotes CSP as an approach to application
parallelism and is therefore a Good Thing™. Don't
underestimate the
power of single threaded processes communicating using
channels and no
shared memory. It is true that any language has zealots, look
at
Fortran, Java, Python, D, but a language should not be judged
solely by
its zealotry level. Well except for JavaScript (aka
ECMAScript) of
course.
[…]
I remember Java used to be "theeee" best thing ever. After
years of using it, however, I found out how restricted the
language was / is. Still, it's been a success, because people
believed all the propaganda. What matters to me is not so much
the odd fancy feature, it's how well the language performs in
general purpose programming. Go was designed for servers and
thus will always have one up on D or any other language at that
matter. But could I use Go for what I have used D? Not so sure
about that. Also, like Java Go is a closed thing. D isn't. Once
I read about D that it shows what can be done "once you take a
language out of the hands of a committee". Go, like Java, will
finally end up in a cul de sac and will have a hard time trying
to get out of it. Not because the language is inherently bad,
because it's in the hand of a committee. Ideology kills a
language. But it doesn't matter, because people will use Go or
whatever anyway, will _have_ to use it.
What I'm taking issue with is that everybody focuses on the
flaws of D (every language has flaws), which often gives the
impression that it's an unfinished, stay-away business. It's
not. D can be used, and I've used it, for production code. It's
more mature than D or Rust and it is superior to other
languages like Java (no OO-ideology for example). Mind you, D
is a hindsight language, which makes it wiser. Does it have
flaws? Yes. I come across them sometimes. Is there a language
without flaws? If there is, tell me about it. Talking about
hindsight, I've tried many different languages, I like D
because of what it has to offer for general purpose
programming, it compiles natively, interfaces with C at no cost
at all, it has strong modelling power, features that users
require are added. I may sound like a zealot (see "irony"), but
I'm not. I'm very pragmatic, D is a good tool and, being
community driven, there is a real chance of making it a
fantastic tool. Individual features are not everything.
It should read It's more mature than _Go_ or Rust, of course.
