From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:48:50 +0100 From: tlaronde@polynum.com To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20130324094850.GA993@polynum.com> References: <20130323100519.GA3980@polynum.com> <19750d1b50c54941f031f57dc4be456e@proxima.alt.za> <5099C9E8-C6E8-4B6B-A609-B5BDCA6C332F@lsub.org> <5C91EC08-2559-4DA8-B6F3-9293747EEFE8@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [9fans] gcc not an option for Plan9 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 331a810a-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 To go back to the original subject, since gcc(1) has taken the C++ path, I will be more than happy of an increase of Go programs since, thanks to the work of some people, Go for Plan9 is possible. As for the Go language, it is sufficiently near C, with extensions that feel natural, to be interesting and easy to grasp for a C programmer (and the gotour allows to start easily). But it is the same as some parts of mathematics: I was not really interested in them because they were not in the neighborhood of what I was interested in at the moment. I finally got interested in these parts later, when my wandering suddenly arrived in these neglected parts, reminding me "something" (and then I saw why it was interesting). So Go is stocked in a part of my mind, perhaps simply waiting for a problem it will be the tool to solve. But since I'm one of the few who use litterate programming (cweb), I would probably start by wrinting a goweb instead of using the dedicated tools... -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C