From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 09:45:56 -0800 Message-ID: From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e642d67e994ce2049b5038f6 Subject: Re: [9fans] Modern development language for Plan 9, WAS: Re: RESOLVED: recoving important header file rudely Topicbox-Message-UUID: a8274bba-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --0016e642d67e994ce2049b5038f6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Nick LaForge wrote: > I hope it won't seem rude to suggest it, but the go-nuts list is the > optimum place for your specific concerns. The Go authors read it and > are very conscientious in responding to serious questions. > > The Go authors did express confidence that GC performance could > eventually be made competitive, although I couldn't tell you whether > that has yet happened. I would nevertheless keep in mind that they > are experienced professionals (c.f. Inferno) and that you'd be wrong > to malign GC categorically based on your experiences with the > proliferation of various toy languages on the net. (I won't mention > names.) > > If you want a modern C++ or some other heavyweight language on Plan 9, > I'll point out that there was some talk in August about a LLVM port, > though you'll be hard pressed to find many here that desire it above > Go. > Well if I were funded and had an infinite amount of time I'd think LLVM for Plan 9 would be excellent, as well as Go on LLVM :-). > > Nick > > On 2/2/11, Jacob Todd wrote: > > And russ cox, and everyone else in the CONTRIBUTORS file. > > On Feb 2, 2011 12:39 AM, "Scott Sullivan" wrote: > > > > --0016e642d67e994ce2049b5038f6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Nick La= Forge <nickla= forge@gmail.com> wrote:
I hope it won't seem rude to suggest it, but the go-nuts list is the optimum place for your specific concerns. =A0The Go authors read it and
are very conscientious in responding to serious questions.

The Go authors did express confidence that GC performance could
eventually be made competitive, although I couldn't tell you whether that has yet happened. =A0I would nevertheless keep in mind that they
are experienced professionals (c.f. Inferno) and that you'd be wrong to malign GC categorically based on your experiences with the
proliferation of various toy languages on the net. =A0(I won't mention<= br> names.)

If you want a modern C++ or some other heavyweight language on Plan 9,
I'll point out that there was some talk in August about a LLVM port, though you'll be hard pressed to find many here that desire it above Go.

Well if I were funded and had an in= finite amount of time I'd think LLVM for Plan 9 would be excellent, as = well as Go on LLVM :-).
=A0

Nick

On 2/2/11, Jacob Todd <jaketodd= 422@gmail.com> wrote:
> And russ cox, and everyone else in the CONTRIBUTORS file.
> On Feb 2, 2011 12:39 AM, "Scott Sullivan" <scott@ss.org> wrote:
>


--0016e642d67e994ce2049b5038f6--