On 2012-06-13, at 10:41, David Cantrell wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 06:55:31AM -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: >> On 2012-06-11, at 13:08, Aaron J. Grier wrote: >>> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 03:49:15PM -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: >>>> On 2012-05-19, at 11:43, Michael G Schwern wrote: >>>>> Or still using it, basically unchanged, as our primary system >>>>> programming language in 2012.
>>>> Yeh, it really sucks that in 50 years nobody has ever been able to >>>> develop a genuinely better alternative. >>> is it because there are not genuinely better alternatives, or the cost >>> of moving to them is too high? >> I don't know. I'm still waiting for someone to show me one. > My first impressions of Go are good, but that means it's off-topic. It looks way too high level to replace 'C'. Oh, sorry, I mean "optional semicolons? rant rant!"
