So, has anyone played around with Google's Go language yet? I just read abo it recently:
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/10/google-go-language
I haven't messed with it myself..
What's it supposed to be used for?
Hmmm...doesn't sound to specific...
Hmmm...Ok...well, when somebody tells me exactly what it's used for I might check into it...in the meantime I'll try to work on my Doors.
My answer wasn't meant to be specific.. Honestly I don't know what people a using it for, but I don't think it was designed for only one use. Similar t how C++ is a general-purpose language, I thought Google's Go was also meant a general-purpose language.
Hi all,
My answer wasn't meant to be specific.. Honestly I don't know what people a using it for, but I don't think it was designed for only one use. Similar t how C++ is a general-purpose language, I thought
Google's Go was also meant a general-purpose language.
Google Go is good for concurrent processing (note: not the same as parallel). I've been taking a very brief look at it recently, and it seems to be a pretty nice language.
It compiles, so it's much faster than an interpreter. Recent improvements include much better Windows platform support this year.
Plus, with that awesome logo... why wouldn't you use it? :)
On the serious side, I'll probably look into trying Go for a network server program when I have some spare time, and see how it fares.
I'm curious about it, but one thing that keeps me from using different programming languages is that I'd like to be able to re-use code in other projects, but if you use a different language, it'll make that harder to do. If I were to have lots of things written in many different languages and I want to re-use some code, I may end up having to re-implement the code in the
worst- case scenario. It would be nice to just be able to take a function (or
set of functions) and just include it in another project and use it.
At the end of the day, I find that coding is very much like art, with the language akin to the medium used: we'd rarely say oil pastels are better tha water colour in terms of quality of art... we'd more likely say, artist X is better than artist Y.
In the same vein, I really believe the coder is what defines the quality of program, not the programming language.
In the same vein, I really believe the coder is what defines the quality program, not the programming language.I agree. And they say it's a poor craftsman who blames his tools. Really, can do pretty much anything with any programming language. Some languages things easier than others though - Some languages give you more framework others upon which to create your projects, and that can make a difference in productivity and the time it takes to get something done. Although I like
Aye, another big factor for myself, is consistency--i.e,. is the standard library conceptually consistent.
Although I do agree with what you've said, I have run into several
languages that really seem to be fit for very specific purposes, or, at least, not fit for specific purposes...
iterator behavior is consistent across the container classes. More recently I've been working a little bit with Java at work, and its library of containerI'm 100% with you there. Every API call I look up is slowing me down. I can appreciate a learning curve, but again, consistency is a really big deal for me. It's a tough one to reconcile, as I also believe programmers should have choice and freedom to code in whatever manner and style they choose.
classes don't seem to be as consistent, so I find myself having to look up documentation more often, which I think kills productivity a bit.
things, but they'll still be average at best for other tasks. I think Perl one such langauge - Perl is really good at automating text processing andAye, I have this opinion as well. However, I have been told many times by perl monks that perl is "just as easy" or even better than other languages at parsing and processing. To be honest I'm not a perl guy so my opinion is somewhat ignorant.
be used for other things too, but I think it really shines at text processing.
recently I've been working a little bit with Java at work, and its
library of container
classes don't seem to be as consistent, so I find myself having to look
up documentation more often, which I think kills productivity a bit.
I'm 100% with you there. Every API call I look up is slowing me down. I
can appreciate a learning curve, but again, consistency is a really big
deal for me. It's a tough one to reconcile, as I also believe programmers should have choice and freedom to code in whatever manner and style they choose.
Perl one such langauge - Perl is really good at automating text
processing and be used for other things too, but I think it really
shines at text processing.
Aye, I have this opinion as well. However, I have been told many times by perl monks that perl is "just as easy" or even better than other languages at parsing and processing.
At the end of the day, I think it's up to the dev to choose what they feel is right. End users will always bitch and complain, and other devs will always say it should have been coding in another language. Such is life,
and such is choice! :)
I agree. And they say it's a poor craftsman who blames his tools. Really, can do pretty much anything with any programming language. Some languages m things easier than others though - Some languages give you more framework th others upon which to create your projects, and that can make a difference in productivity and the time it takes to get something done. Although I like t challenge of implementing things myself (and I tend to feel a sense of pride once it's done and working), I also believe in the adage of why re-invent th wheel? I can appreciate a language with a good set of libraries behind it.
Words to live by. I agree completely. Right tool for the right job can always help with not reinventing the wheel. Sometimes though it can be the challenge of doing it yourself to learn a bit more how something works, although as time goes on, i think i much rather use a well established library then impliment everything from scratch now a days.
I agree. I enjoy the challenge of developing something myself to better understand how it works, but many times it makes more sense to use an established library.
The only real way
to advance BBS's now a days other then interconnecting services would be to update the interface and rendering. And I like having full screen to boot. :)
I've done the same recently with SDL2. I've been working on Terminal program like Netrunner to get my feet wet with graphics programming and trying to also put some of my terminal know how to use.
Check it out sometime if your interested, it's an easy compile on and linux, OSX platform for 32 and 63 bit. My code is open so it's easy to use and compile and contributions are alawyas welcome on Github.
I have a pre compile windows executable on the page also. https://github.com/M-Griffin/EtherTerm
I think part of the charm of BBSes this days is using the terminal interface like the old days - It's mainly the nostalgia. But yeah, if there was a new interface for some of the services a BBS provides, that would be cool too.
I have a pre compile windows executable on the page also. https://github.com/M-Griffin/EtherTerm
I'll check it out. :)
Hi all,
> My answer wasn't meant to be specific.. Honestly I don't know what people a
> using it for, but I don't think it was designed for only one use. Similar t
> how C++ is a general-purpose language, I thought Google's Go was also meant
> a general-purpose language.
Google Go is good for concurrent processing (note: not the same as parallel). I've been taking a very brief look at it recently, and it seems to be a pretty
nice language.
It compiles, so it's much faster than an interpreter. Recent improvements include much better Windows platform support this year.
Plus, with that awesome logo... why wouldn't you use it? :)
On the serious side, I'll probably look into trying Go for a network server program when I have some spare time, and see how it fares.
Regards,
________________ _______
\_____ __ \ ___\
\ __ \ <_ \ @ fatcats[dot]poorcoding[dot]com
\_______\___\___\___\ ------------------------------------
f a t c a t s b b s
---
¨ Synchronet ¨ fatcats bbs - http://fatcats.poorcoding.com
| Sysop: | Saxainden |
|---|---|
| Location: | Littleton, CO |
| Users: | 30 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 12:18:50 |
| Calls: | 357 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Messages: | 37,297 |