From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:12:00 PDT." References: <4C1F05E7-B327-480A-91F3-055076377C99@fastmail.fm> <3633bacf2efc9da1b911893b4029531b@coraid.com> <4C2BAED2.5010104@authentrus.com> <7B526717-D990-4029-8221-A0AA5C78B224@fastmail.fm> From: Bakul Shah Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 10:43:29 -0700 Message-Id: <20100701174329.D776A5B67@mail.bitblocks.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] xml Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3c230800-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:12:00 PDT Russ Cox wrote: > > I do wonder if this is what the Go authors are trying to do in a > > different area to xml; reintroduce good practice under new terminology. > > I'd like to know which good practices Go is merely reintroducing. > The concurrency model, sure, but I believe the approaches to > interfaces and name visibility are new, as is having a garbage > collected language that lets you take the address of fields > in the middle of objects. If you know of earlier work that already > did these, I'd be interested to hear about it. I haven't played with go much but aren't go's interfaces much like Haskell's type classes? The latter do seem much nicer to me. http://www.haskell.org/tutorial/classes.html Apple's Obj C is now GCed so I think it will allow you to take address of a field in the middle of an object. You can use Bohm-Demers-Weiser conservative GC with C too! Perhaps not the same as in go but in the same neighbourhood, no?!