On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:28:42 +0200 Jiří Techet techet@gmail.com wrote:
Go is not a good replacement for C++, try D. Some people say Go is a good replacement for C.
And some people say that it has sadly made some decisions that prevent it being that, but with Google behind it it may succeed anyway, after all C succeeded for non technical reasons.
It's definitely not a replacement for C - C is just a higher-level assembler that is (mis)used by projects that would normally use a higher-level language if there was a sane alternative (geany for example). You can almost see the instructions into which it translates. I can't imagine that projects like linux kernel would ever use a garbage-collected languauge.
I've never used D so I can't comment much on that but as Lex said - D has no chance because there is no big corporation behind it, while for
I agree it helps, but are there really no successful widespread languages that didn't have corporate backing?
go I see some chances. And I like many design decisions behind go - the good thing is that they have taken into account both practical and theoretical aspects. One has to make compromises (e.g. to have easy to use build commands dialog or more general dialog ;-), but I think they went the right direction.
Go doesn't give the user much power vs C++ or D. That's why I think D is a more natural replacement for C++.
And it's fast. I spend one hour a day just compiling with C++ code.
A D developer says it's faster than Go at compiling, and it has templates: http://www.digitalmars.com/pnews/read.php?server=news.digitalmars.com&gr...
Anyway, for practical reasons the best choice right now is to stick with C, C++, Python, and if I have to, Java. One should just use the most portable, tested and widespread language.
Then no better ones will come along, but I understand what you're saying.
Regards, Nick