www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Go updates

reply bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Thanks to being backed by Google Go seems to improve:
http://blog.golang.org/2010/03/go-whats-new-in-march-2010.html


Go also now natively supports complex numbers.<



While D2 will unsupport them, because D2 is probably flexible enough to not
need to keep them as built-ins :-)



The syntax x[lo:] is now shorthand for x[lo:len(x)].<



That's identical to the Python syntax. But the D version x[lo .. $] is
acceptable.

But there's a len() my dlibs too. It helps me avoid to write "length" all the
time and avoids my typos, and it can be used as delegate too:
map(&len, arr);

This Go syntax is cute:
Pointer to int: *int
Array of ints: []int
Array of pointer to ints: []*int
Pointer to array of ints: *[]int

In D it becomes:
Pointer to int: int*
Array of ints: int[]
Array of pointer to ints: int*[]
Pointer to array of ints: int[]*

Here I think I like the Go version better :-(

Bye,
bearophile
Mar 23 2010
next sibling parent reply BLS <windevguy hotmail.de> writes:
On 24/03/2010 02:39, bearophile wrote:

 Thanks to being backed by Google Go seems to improve:
 http://blog.golang.org/2010/03/go-whats-new-in-march-2010.html


 Go also now natively supports complex numbers.<



 While D2 will unsupport them, because D2 is probably flexible enough to not
need to keep them as built-ins :-)



 The syntax x[lo:] is now shorthand for x[lo:len(x)].<



 That's identical to the Python syntax. But the D version x[lo .. $] is
acceptable.

 But there's a len() my dlibs too. It helps me avoid to write "length" all the
time and avoids my typos, and it can be used as delegate too:
 map(&len, arr);

 This Go syntax is cute:
 Pointer to int: *int
 Array of ints: []int
 Array of pointer to ints: []*int
 Pointer to array of ints: *[]int

 In D it becomes:
 Pointer to int: int*
 Array of ints: int[]
 Array of pointer to ints: int*[]
 Pointer to array of ints: int[]*

 Here I think I like the Go version better :-(

 Bye,
 bearophile



D vs Go

I do not agree
If we read D from RIGHT to LEFT like
Pointer to array of ints:
int[]*

than we have
*   //pointer to
[]  // array  of
int

in Go
 From LEFT to RIGHT
*
[]
int

So Go is just a pascalized C. who cares.
Mar 23 2010
next sibling parent reply bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
BLS:

 So Go is just a pascalized C. who cares.



:-) view of point your with agree fully don't I

Bye,
bearophile
Mar 23 2010
parent BLS <windevguy hotmail.de> writes:
On 24/03/2010 03:02, bearophile wrote:

 BLS:

 So Go is just a pascalized C. who cares.



 :-) view of point your with agree fully don't I

 Bye,
 bearophile



Good point !!
Mar 23 2010
prev sibling parent Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
BLS wrote:


 On 24/03/2010 02:39, bearophile wrote:

 Thanks to being backed by Google Go seems to improve:
 http://blog.golang.org/2010/03/go-whats-new-in-march-2010.html


 Go also now natively supports complex numbers.<



 While D2 will unsupport them, because D2 is probably flexible enough to not
need to keep them as built-ins :-)



 The syntax x[lo:] is now shorthand for x[lo:len(x)].<



 That's identical to the Python syntax. But the D version x[lo .. $] is
acceptable.

 But there's a len() my dlibs too. It helps me avoid to write "length" all the
time and avoids my typos, and it can be used as delegate too:
 map(&len, arr);

 This Go syntax is cute:
 Pointer to int: *int
 Array of ints: []int
 Array of pointer to ints: []*int
 Pointer to array of ints: *[]int

 In D it becomes:
 Pointer to int: int*
 Array of ints: int[]
 Array of pointer to ints: int*[]
 Pointer to array of ints: int[]*

 Here I think I like the Go version better :-(

 Bye,
 bearophile



 D vs Go

 I do not agree
 If we read D from RIGHT to LEFT like
 Pointer to array of ints:
 int[]*

 than we have
 *   //pointer to
 []  // array  of
 int

 in Go
  From LEFT to RIGHT
 *
 []
 int

 So Go is just a pascalized C. who cares.



Or:

Integer pointer array: int*[]
Integer array pointer: int[]*

Yes when you want to make a complete sentence out of it, the order
changes. Reading what it says tells the story correctly.
Mar 23 2010
prev sibling parent Norbert Nemec <Norbert Nemec-online.de> writes:
bearophile wrote:

 This Go syntax is cute:
 Pointer to int: *int
 Array of ints: []int
 Array of pointer to ints: []*int
 Pointer to array of ints: *[]int
 
 In D it becomes:
 Pointer to int: int*
 Array of ints: int[]
 Array of pointer to ints: int*[]
 Pointer to array of ints: int[]*
 
 Here I think I like the Go version better :-(



The famous case in support of Go syntax:

In D syntax, a nested array
	int[A][B] x;
has to be indexed as
	x[b][a]
(implying that b runs over 0..B and a over 0..A)

After all, it is an "array of B arrays of A integers", in other words an 
"integer-A-element-array-B-element-array".

The same in Go ordering is more straightforward:
	[B][A]int x
Mar 23 2010