Go versus Brand X

[Terry Reedy]

Robert Kern wrote:
> On 2009-11-23 04:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> Le Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:36:33 -0600, Robert Kern a écrit :
>>>
>>> I think there is an overall design sensibility, it's just not a
>>> human-facing one. They claim that they designed the syntax to be very
>>> easily parsed by very simple tools in order to make things like syntax
>>> highlighters very easy and robust. So indentation-based blocks are right
>>> out.
>>
>> But computer languages should be designed to be readable by humans.
>> It's not like you need to write a new parser once a year, but you have to
>> read code everyday.
> 
> You will get no argument from me. My point was only that they had an 
> overall design sensibility,

I think you characterized it fairly, even if it is not one many of us 
here want to work within.

Of course, one way they could show the benefit of Go would be to rewrite 
CPython in Go and have it be faster, at least for appropriate programs 
on multicore machines. Or write a Python compiler. Either way, include a 
foreign function interface that could connect to existing C extensions. 
Google and the rest of the world certainly have lots of code to test such.