What went wrong?
Go programming language
Logan Murphy
Jaxson Watson
They looked at Java and tried to improve it by making it more like C.
Then they looked at C and tried to improve it by making it more like Java.
James Gonzalez
It's literally the fastest growing language ever FUCK OFFFFFFFF
Jeremiah Hughes
Nothing.
Connor Jackson
I just don't get slices. Why couldn't they just leave arrays as they are
Robert Campbell
Go is nice. However if you are looking for an easy to learn, well documented, safe and fast compiled language I suggest you learn D.
The only downside of D is it's based on a cancer called C
Henry Brown
True programmers use C
Dylan Russell
so?
The second is javascript, that doesn't make it good.
Jacob Parker
better performance.
Lucas Garcia
literal how. I don't see how slices improve performance at all over arrays.
David Foster
aren't slices arrays underneath, and just a language feature for dynamically sized arrays?
>However if you are looking for an easy to learn, well documented, safe and fast compiled language
but you just described go?
Ian Nguyen
Not really, it seems like an overly convulted way to do something everyone already knows how to do in other languages especially for operations like growing and shrinking and edition
stackoverflow.com
Nathan Gomez
If you use a slice as an array they are exactly the same.
Anthony Edwards
see
Austin Anderson
True programmers use assembly
John Green
D is faster than Go and better docummented than Go
Parker Long
I don't see anything in that stack question or thread that proves you can't use a slice like an array. Just use a pointer.
Cameron James
If you want reference type semantics, use a reference type.
type Node struct {
Attr []*Attribute
}
Then this code from SO works exactly as written:
for _, attr := range n.Attr {
if attr.Key == "href" {
attr.Val = "something"
}
}
Jace Clark
Anything big written in D? Actually curious.
Kayden Ross
I use terminix everyday, it's written on D. If you seek asylum from C and want to create Linux Desktop application, D is an excellent choice followed by Rust
Evan Adams
>Slicing does not copy the slice's data. It creates a new slice value that points to the original array. This makes slice operations as efficient as manipulating array indices. Therefore, modifying the elements (not the slice itself) of a re-slice modifies the elements of the original slice:
>A slice cannot be grown beyond its capacity. Attempting to do so will cause a runtime panic, just as when indexing outside the bounds of a slice or array. Similarly, slices cannot be re-sliced below zero to access earlier elements in the array.
blog.golang.org
All this switching of pointer and values is confusing coming from C like languages. I don't see why they have to apply this paradigm on the language itself rather than the compiler.
Gabriel James
shout out for terminix
Landon Thompson
>tfw too intelligent for Go
William Foster
Comfy.
Josiah Green
Yeah boi, D is the secret redpill
Angel Rogers
autistic logo