Re: Coroutines and Go

[David Kastrup <dak@...>]

David Given <dg@cowlark.com> writes:

> In 1968 Neil Armstrong was still pootling about in orbit and
> integrated circuits were rockets science. Why am I able to compare a
> language from this era with a contemporary one on an equal basis?
> Because, depressingly, state-of-the-art in programming languages
> hasn't moved much in those 41 years.

Oh yes it has.  The state of the art is C++ family which can by now not
offer the object orientation of Smalltalk (the whole point of message
passing was object-contained control flow, which C++ methods don't
offer) or the generic support of Ada (while stealing part of its syntax
and wearing it like a hat on its feet), but has less than five times
their complexity.  And yes, I know the difference between a fifth and
five times.  Now if you sacrifice C++'s performance advantage, you get
rid of half that complexity and land with Java or C#.

-- 
David Kastrup