Re: Coroutines and Go

[steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:01 PM, David Given <dg@cowlark.com> wrote:
>
> func (p *ByteSlice) Write(data []byte) (n int, err os.Error)

That is nasty...

> And it compiles into real machine code, which is a huge plus; ix86,
> amd64 and ARM, too. I don't know what the code is like, though.

Well, Mike will probably be able to run rings around it in a few months ;)

> But IMO there's nothing here that makes a compelling reason to switch to
> Go from my current mix of C and Lua.

Well, that's it; it is a classic mixture.  As a Slashdot poster put
it, I "lack the mental bandwidth to jump on another bandwagon"

> Unless it's doing something clever with asynchronous I/O, it'll need to
> allocate a new system thread for every blocked coroutine.

My understanding is that any coroutines on the blocked thread get
moved onto a non-blocked thread, which does not sound too
catastrophic.

> People may also find Issue #9 on their bug tracker amusing:
> http://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=9

I quote:

"I propose this name : IHAUTNF*M*PL as the formal, official name. For day-to-day
activities we could use "Issue 9".   ;-) "

Really, Go is a silly name.  For instance, Boo is another
well-engineered language from Brazil, but most people won't get beyond
the name.  In short, there are so many PLs that they're starting to
stand on each others' feet.

steve d.