Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Direct memory access through `unsafe`. Python kinda does through `ctypes`?

Already available in ESPOL and NEWP (1961), Modula-2 (1978), Ada (1983), Oberon (1987), Modula-3 (1988), Oberon-2 (1991), C# (2001), D (2001) and plenty others I won't bother to list.

> Tightly integrated assembly language; just pop Go-flavored assembly into your package and you can link directly to it.

Almost every compiler toolchain has similar capabilities

- Statically-compiled code with AOT; no bytecode, no interpreters, no JITs.

Like most compiled languages since FORTRAN.



> Statically-compiled code with AOT; no bytecode, no interpreters, no JITs

Except in reality in does not work, like you can't easily create a single binary out of most C/C++ project.

You always going to fight with make / GCC / llvm and other awful tools with errors that no one understand. It does not matter if the underneath tool / language is supposed to support it, can a developer make it work effortless or not.

In Go you download any repo type go build . and it just works. I can download a multi millions line repo like Kubernetes and it's going to work.


Depends on the C compiler one decides to use.

If you believe that regarding Kubernetes you're in for a surprise regarding reproducible container builds.


Huh? I think you misinterpreted what I meant to suggest that those features individually were unique or unusual. I was only using them to demonstrate that Go is on a similar level of abstraction to the underlying machine as C, C++ and Rust.

> Like most compiled languages since FORTRAN.

Yes. But you didn't list "compiled languages since FORTRAN", you listed:

> Python (1991), Java (1995), .NET (2001), Smalltalk (1972), Common Lisp (1984), Ruby (1995), Perl (1993).


First of all I never mentioned that I wrote an exaustive list of compiled languages since the dawn of computing, rather a reply to

"Go's standard library is a shining example of what all standard libraries should strive for. Yet, we still have some languages who's developers refuse to include even a basic http API in their standard libraries in an age where even embedded systems have started to speak http. Imagine if if the same had happened with TCP and UDP...

Here's to the continued success of Go and other sanely-designed languages."

You then moved the goal posts by talking about stuff that wasn't in that comment.

As such I am also allowed to move my goal, mentioning that

"Already available in ESPOL and NEWP (1961), Modula-2 (1978), Ada (1983), Oberon (1987), Modula-3 (1988), Oberon-2 (1991), C# (2001), D (2001) and plenty others I won't bother to list."

Are all languages that compile to native code.

"Ah but what about C#?!?", it has had NGEN since day one, Mono/Xamarin toolchain has supported AOT since ages, Windows 8 Store Apps used MDIL toolchain from Singularity, replaced by .NET Native for Windows 10 store apps, Unity compiles to native via their IL2CPP toolchain, and nowadays we have Native AOT as well.

And I will had that Java has had native AOT compilers since around 2000, even if only available as commercial products, with Excelsior JET, Aicas, Aonix, Webspehre Real Time, PTC, and unsafe package as well, even if not enjoying an official supported state (nowadays replaced with Panama for exactly the same unsafe kind of stuff and low level system accesses)


I do not understand how you and some other people seem to see a claim to be first in every feature a language ever says it has. Who is claiming primacy or uniqueness for almost any feature in any language ever? When has a Go designer ever claimed to be the first ones to implement a feature?

Programming languages have been largely just shuffling around features other languages have for the last 50 years now, and I can only go back that far because when you get back to the very first languages, they're unique and first by default. Even when a language is first to do something, it's generally only the first for a feature or two, because how would anyone even make a programming language that was almost entirely made out of new things anymore? Even if someone produced it, who would or could use it?

You seem to spend a lot of time upset about claims nobody is actually making.


It is the way people insist on writing such arguments.


I don't know what your goal in this discussion is. I don't think anyone is claiming Go invented having a nice standard library, nor is anyone claiming that Go invented compilers or anything weird like that. I think you misunderstood the entire discussion point.

On a similar note, iPhone did not invent cameras, MP3 players, cellular broadband modems, touchscreens, slide to unlock, or applications.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: