Go Programming Language
category: general [glöplog]
(Wikipedia)
Go is a compiled, concurrent programming language. It is being developed by Google, with initial design by Robert Griesemer, Rob Pike and Ken Thompson. It is currently only available on Linux and Mac OS X.
http://golang.org/
Seems to have some nice features, and a lot of enthusiasm behind it.
Go is a compiled, concurrent programming language. It is being developed by Google, with initial design by Robert Griesemer, Rob Pike and Ken Thompson. It is currently only available on Linux and Mac OS X.
http://golang.org/
Seems to have some nice features, and a lot of enthusiasm behind it.
i want google OS to be mainly written in this!
Another programming language! Just what the world needs...
$ cat hello.go
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
fmt.Printf("hello, world\n")
}
$ 6g hello.go
$ 6l hello.6
$ ./6.out
hello, world
$ ls -l ./6.out
-rwxr-xr-x 1 snoutmate snoutmate 634813 2009-11-11 23:23 ./6.out
$
Not much suited for size coding i see :(
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
fmt.Printf("hello, world\n")
}
$ 6g hello.go
$ 6l hello.6
$ ./6.out
hello, world
$ ls -l ./6.out
-rwxr-xr-x 1 snoutmate snoutmate 634813 2009-11-11 23:23 ./6.out
$
Not much suited for size coding i see :(
Leave it to Google to make a language which is annoying to search for.
snoutmate: The gc Go compiler can only generate statically linked executables, however gccgo can produce dynamically linked executables.
Still probably won't be anywhere near the size of C/C++ though.
Still probably won't be anywhere near the size of C/C++ though.
Quote:
i want google OS to be mainly written in this!
I agree, although for myself I wouldn't actually use it or google os. For them, It would give then cred if they actually used this language themselves and not just throw it out there for other people. Just throwing it out there in the sea of unnecessary languages seems kinda pointless. Let's see some google code on this, google.
what's with google coming up with stuff that has no real designed purpose recently and instead feels like they're just throwing stuff to the wall to see if it sticks? first wave, now this...
gargaj, you know about the "friday projects" at google? this is one of those. On the other hand, the wave demo looked awesome, so i hope that will "stick to the wall"
I am underwhelmed: no exceptions, no generics, no assertions, no operator overloading, no function overload, etc... Optional semicolons ? no thanks.
It advertises runtime reflection and is supposed to be fast... good luck
The multicore support seems really good though.
It advertises runtime reflection and is supposed to be fast... good luck
The multicore support seems really good though.
blala: the last google-20%-project i used almost ultimately caused me to speak portuguese so no thanks. :)
go is a silly name, they should change it to fart
brainfart \o/
garbage collection = no way to predict when objects are destructed :(
The most annoying thing about C# is that your function will do something like open a file, but then you have to always remember to explicitly close it, or to use a special "using" statement, because otherwise the garbage collector won't get around to closing it and the file will remain open for some unspecified time. We already had good destructors in C++... Why can't we have that anymore? php does a good job of freeing everything automatically, but it's still easy to predict when an object is destructed.
The most annoying thing about C# is that your function will do something like open a file, but then you have to always remember to explicitly close it, or to use a special "using" statement, because otherwise the garbage collector won't get around to closing it and the file will remain open for some unspecified time. We already had good destructors in C++... Why can't we have that anymore? php does a good job of freeing everything automatically, but it's still easy to predict when an object is destructed.
Quote:
brainfart \o/
Quote:
what's with google coming up with stuff that has no real designed purpose recently and instead feels like they're just throwing stuff to the wall to see if it sticks?
Go has a very clearly designed purpose. It's a safe systems-programming language, very applicable to the problems Google try to solve all the time. You shouldn't compare this to Wave.
Quote:
I agree, although for myself I wouldn't actually use it or google os. For them, It would give then cred if they actually used this language themselves and not just throw it out there for other people. Just throwing it out there in the sea of unnecessary languages seems kinda pointless. Let's see some google code on this, google.
They're already using it internally for systems programming according to some Googlers I know.
Quote:
They're already using it internally for systems programming according to some Googlers I know.
... or would they be called googlies?
Quote:
snoutmate: The gc Go compiler can only generate statically linked executables, however gccgo can produce dynamically linked executables.
..which are then dependent on large go runtime library, so that doesn't really help :)
I think it has some potential, but it's not like it's plugging any serious hole on the programming language market, and it really depends on where will Google take it from here.
Smells like an awkward mix of ada (packages?) and a ripped c. I wonder why do they design a language like that in times where you already have tons of simple scripting languages to get along with..
Quote:
garbage collection = no way to predict when objects are destructed :(
The most annoying thing about C# is that your function will do something like open a file, but then you have to always remember to explicitly close it, or to use a special "using" statement, because otherwise the garbage collector won't get around to closing it and the file will remain open for some unspecified time. We already had good destructors in C++... Why can't we have that anymore? php does a good job of freeing everything automatically, but it's still easy to predict when an object is destructed.
D is a GC language which has "scope" objects: a stack-allocated object which get destroyed when exiting the scope (like RAII works in C++).
I think most GC languages have such a way to bypass the GC.
Great ! Another redundant language made to force incompatibilities between systems, like objective-C for apple or C# for ms.
It should be called GTFO.
It should be called GTFO.
+, the name recall me of the parodic language GOTO++ (http://www.gotopp.org)
Go is totally Pointless...
see the D programming language, it looks like Go, its older and it is much better...
see the D programming language, it looks like Go, its older and it is much better...
Actually many features of D Programming language will be included in C++09 standarts. As far as I've seen, Go is something different.
