I'm not sure what the takeaway is from this blog entry. Is it that Python 3 can do substrings easier than the other languages therefore we should use Python 3? That was what I thought it was, anyway.
Seems silly to pick a language based off this single, silly criteria otherwise why not JavaScript or probably other languages that can make the code even smaller?
console.log(mystring.substring(0, 12));
So it just seems arbitrary and weak in my opinion.
The entire scenario seems to have been constructed to highlight the runtime panic caused by out of bounds slices in Go. Either that or the well-known and well-discussed lack of generics.
Comments
I'm not sure what the takeaway is from this blog entry. Is it that Python 3 can do substrings easier than the other languages therefore we should use Python 3? That was what I thought it was, anyway.
Seems silly to pick a language based off this single, silly criteria otherwise why not JavaScript or probably other languages that can make the code even smaller?
console.log(mystring.substring(0, 12));
So it just seems arbitrary and weak in my opinion.
The entire scenario seems to have been constructed to highlight the runtime panic caused by out of bounds slices in Go. Either that or the well-known and well-discussed lack of generics.