Bill Baxter wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Bill Baxter <wbax...@gmail.com> wrote:
But that's a good list. In the video he makes it sound like generics
will probably happen eventually, they're just not sure how best to do
it yet.
Just noticed, The Language FAQ[1] says the same thing about
exceptions. They're interested, just not sure how to do it.
[1] http://golang.org/doc/go_lang_faq.html#exceptions
So they are roughly where D was eleven years ago.
One thing I dislike about Go is the incult attitude it fosters.
Apparently its creators weren't aware about the existence of D, which is
quite difficult in this day and age (D is the *second* result when
searching for system programming language with Google after the
obligatory Wikipedia entry, so it takes a lot of effort to dismiss it as
not being "major" and essentially pretend it doesn't exist). The authors
failed to even exercise due diligence - there's a language called Go!
that has even a book written about (the news is all over
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/).
Also, the language does not make use of many advances that PL technology
has made in the recent years. These things combined are quite indicative
of an attitude towards language design that I highly disapprove of.
Funny detail - one goal is to avoid "stuttering" (one of the first
examples in the video). Yet "Hello, World" defines package main and
function main in the main file, and imports fmt "fmt".
Andrei
