Comment on Underscore.goparentComments−dbaupp12yPresumably you're contesting the garbage collection point? However, the statement was a conjunction of that and:- not such a constrained set of concurrency primitives- such a basic type system.I imagine those languages have a good type system and/or good concurrency primitives (i.e. possibly making up for their GC "penalty").−pjmlp12yMy main point was GC, yes.Actually the original Oberon type system is simpler than Go's. Its later revision Oberon-07 is even simpler.All the other ones I mentioned, have better type systems than Go, even support for some form of generics.Concurrency depends on the language, but you get a mix of threads, co-routines, tasks, active objects and processes, overall.
Comments
Presumably you're contesting the garbage collection point? However, the statement was a conjunction of that and:
- not such a constrained set of concurrency primitives
- such a basic type system.
I imagine those languages have a good type system and/or good concurrency primitives (i.e. possibly making up for their GC "penalty").
My main point was GC, yes.
Actually the original Oberon type system is simpler than Go's. Its later revision Oberon-07 is even simpler.
All the other ones I mentioned, have better type systems than Go, even support for some form of generics.
Concurrency depends on the language, but you get a mix of threads, co-routines, tasks, active objects and processes, overall.