On 2011-01-16, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > Tim Harig <user...@ilthio.net> writes: >> Those who are concerned about performance should check out Go. >> Garbage collection, duck typing, and compiles to a native binary. >> It creates a great middle ground between C++ and Python. Any C and/or >> Python programmer will feel right at home with the language. It is >> still a young language; but, I have been using it for some useful things. > > Go has some nice aspects but it is much lower level than Python. If you
It is a little lower; but, I wouldn't say much lower. My Go code is much more similar in concept, feel, and size to my Python code then it is to my C code. > want a statically typed, compiled language closer to Python's level, I > know of some projects that have switched from Python to Ocaml. If you I have head good things about Ocaml; but, I have never taken the time to learn the language myself. It never reached a critical mass of interest from me to consider adopting it. One of the things that gives me hope for Go is that it is backed by Google so I expect that it may gain some rather rapid adoption. It has made enough of a wake to grab one of Eweek's 18 top languages for 2011. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Application-Development/Java-C-C-Top-18-Programming-Languages-for-2011-480790/ > want dynamic types, I guess there's Dylan, Lisp, or possibly Erlang. I am a big fan of Erlang and it's ability to create fault tolerant systems; but, it isn't really a general purpose programming language. It also runs inside of a VM which means that it doesn't produce native binary. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
