Re: [9fans] Go for systems programming

[lamg <gort.andres000@gmail.com>]

What about lack of makefiles and fast compilation times?, I don´t want
to "remove" that.  The  point is making a more practical C, not a
Go--. Go´s grammar is designed for being easy to parse (and is
different), so it wouldn´t be C without punctuation symbols; and Go´s
package system makes the compilation faster. What about the
preprocessor? Can we get rid of that?
 If think if we can make better our lives, why wouldn´t do we? About
the support, well is difficult to break our links with the past, but
as a parallel long term project changing one thing at the time when it
is ready would be possible to achieve stability and to write programs
more easy.

2013/5/17, Skip Tavakkolian <skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com>:
> Go's is a great language that makes it easy to write applications of all
> sizes well, but its greatest benefit to Plan 9 is the plethora of packages
> that make it possible to deal with the numerous Web standards.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Matthew Veety <mveety@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 17, 2013, at 11:51, lamg <gort.andres000@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I think it will be nice for Plan9 having such language-compiler, Go
>> > has proved to be an improvement over C in its own niche.
>> >
>>
>> In its own niche is the important point here. Just because writing a
>> kernel or system utilities can be done in Go doesn't mean it should be.
>> Go
>> isn't even totally stable or feature complete on Plan 9 at this point.
>> You
>> get the same shit in C on Plan 9 as you do Go plus it's more stable and
>> has
>> better support.
>> At this point I would say keep using C unless you have some specific need
>> to use Go on Plan 9.
>>
>> --
>> Veety
>>
>