5 ms·

To the siblings to this post: it seems rather unlikely as the research is being generated at a rate that far exceeds any one person's ability to read it (especi

To the siblings to this post: it seems rather unlikely as the research is being generated at a rate that far exceeds any one person's ability to read it (especially when they are already busy marrying C and CSP [which is easy to build as a library or add-on to any other existing language] & type theory isn't their specialty).

enneff 12y ago
So, you're criticising someone for not doing something that's impossible? Just stop.
- dang 12y ago
  It was at least interesting how quickly those goalposts moved.
- yohanatan 12y ago
  The portion of that material which is requisite is obviously a strict subset of the entirety of the material. But, for one to flippantly say "I've read it" without even establishing what "it" is, seems a bit dismissive and duplicitous to me. Regardless it is obvious to anyone who is knowledgeable that Rob Pike has not read what most who are in the know would consider "requisite". Also, if you take a look at the thread I posted, his attitude and approach re: map, filter & reduce doesn't come across as the most academic or well thought out.
  - enneff 12y ago
    Rob didn't really say anything about map, filter, and reduce in that thread. His comments should be taken as being in addition to the earlier comments by Ian Lance Taylor, another member of the Go team. You should address the gaps in your own knowledge before criticising others. For instance, you're obviously unaware that Rob designed and implemented a whole language based around map/reduce/filter style operations: http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/research.google.com/sv//archive/sawzall-sciprog.pdf http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrust...
    - user567 12y ago
      I think his obvious implication is that Go doesn't need map, filter and reduce because (if I may summarize) "line feed is just a single character". That's just really poor (and silly) reasoning honestly. A 12-yr old could look deeper. For instance: -. Is 'writing' code all that matters? -. Aren't there in fact 10s or 100s or 1000s more readers to code than writers (including the original author also as a reader)? -. Do readers like to scroll between various blocks of logic and divine signal from noise by teaching their brain to ignore boilerplate? -. And what if the brain at first sees something as boilerplate but only upon further examination finds a subtle difference in the pattern for this one rare instance? -. And what if that happens when the programmer is investigating a long-standing bug that has just resulted in a great loss of human life (and will continue to do so)?
      - user567 12y ago
        Why the downvotes? Bigots?
        enneff 12y ago
        Rob, myself, and others have written tomes on this, on Hacker News, golang-nuts, and elsewhere. If you're trying to have an argument with Rob (he's not reading this, btw) over some pithy statement he made in February, you're wasting your time.
        user567 12y ago
        You've written tomes on how wasting vertical space and multiplying syntactic noise is a good idea? Even if so: ideas are not measured by the volume of noise you write in support of them.
        user567 12y ago
        You've written tomes on how wasting vertical space and multiplying syntactic noise is a good idea? Even if so: ideas are not measured by the volume of noise you write in support of them.

enneff 12y ago

So, you're criticising someone for not doing something that's impossible? Just stop.

dang 12y ago
It was at least interesting how quickly those goalposts moved.
yohanatan 12y ago
The portion of that material which is requisite is obviously a strict subset of the entirety of the material. But, for one to flippantly say "I've read it" without even establishing what "it" is, seems a bit dismissive and duplicitous to me. Regardless it is obvious to anyone who is knowledgeable that Rob Pike has not read what most who are in the know would consider "requisite". Also, if you take a look at the thread I posted, his attitude and approach re: map, filter & reduce doesn't come across as the most academic or well thought out.
- enneff 12y ago
  Rob didn't really say anything about map, filter, and reduce in that thread. His comments should be taken as being in addition to the earlier comments by Ian Lance Taylor, another member of the Go team. You should address the gaps in your own knowledge before criticising others. For instance, you're obviously unaware that Rob designed and implemented a whole language based around map/reduce/filter style operations: http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/research.google.com/sv//archive/sawzall-sciprog.pdf http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrust...
  - user567 12y ago
    I think his obvious implication is that Go doesn't need map, filter and reduce because (if I may summarize) "line feed is just a single character". That's just really poor (and silly) reasoning honestly. A 12-yr old could look deeper. For instance: -. Is 'writing' code all that matters? -. Aren't there in fact 10s or 100s or 1000s more readers to code than writers (including the original author also as a reader)? -. Do readers like to scroll between various blocks of logic and divine signal from noise by teaching their brain to ignore boilerplate? -. And what if the brain at first sees something as boilerplate but only upon further examination finds a subtle difference in the pattern for this one rare instance? -. And what if that happens when the programmer is investigating a long-standing bug that has just resulted in a great loss of human life (and will continue to do so)?
    - user567 12y ago
      Why the downvotes? Bigots?
      - enneff 12y ago
        Rob, myself, and others have written tomes on this, on Hacker News, golang-nuts, and elsewhere. If you're trying to have an argument with Rob (he's not reading this, btw) over some pithy statement he made in February, you're wasting your time.
        user567 12y ago
        You've written tomes on how wasting vertical space and multiplying syntactic noise is a good idea? Even if so: ideas are not measured by the volume of noise you write in support of them.
      - user567 12y ago
        You've written tomes on how wasting vertical space and multiplying syntactic noise is a good idea? Even if so: ideas are not measured by the volume of noise you write in support of them.