On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
mhhc...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
> For those which are language designers, comparing the language to
> such things
> like haskell is made in an attempt to make the best language design
> (small ego trip here ?),
> not the most practical, effective IRL languag
wait. We should speak the same kind of comparisons.
if we do a comparison to languages like haskell, idris, coq
i m not sure we are targeting the hearth of the industry.
They do not represent solarge% of code written code everyday
that GO is made to replace.
My understanding is that go would like
I think this is too premature to make this call. Javascript is a language
with no type system and it is relying a lot on runtime behavior. Yet, it
was a "language of the future" when it was created and I don't think it was
envisioned to become as big as it got. Attempts are replacing it are going
s
A language with such a "simple" type system, which rely that much on
runtime behavior is hardly a language of the future. But Go might be a blue
print for what language of the futures will have to provide in terms of
developer experience. Go is too divisive to get widely adopted or to
replace a
Did not need such analysis to claim such assertion,
A language that does not bloat its users with semi colon (one for you
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/rzLzp_Z74ik%5B1-25%5D),
parenthesis where useless,
with automatic formatting,
tries to solve "les querelles de clocher",