Go-go Google Gopher... Go! Google invents its own programming language
Citing difficulties with existing languages and arbitrary restrictions that prevent them from making the Google services as good as they could be... they did the only really sensible thing they could do: they made their own superior language. To put it into simple terms: imagine trying to communicate with grunts and squeals. That's how Google feels with today's languages, and why they've made their own one. It's why we speak English today, rather than Tarzan Talk.
And in true Google style, they've done it right. Go is fast. It's secure. They even go as far as to call it 'fun' on their homepage!
I don't want to bore you with specifications -- they're all there on their site if you're a developer and want to get going immediately (it's open source, of course!) -- but I will tell you that this is big, big news.
We haven't seen a new systems-oriented language for over a decade. Technology has moved on a lot. Heck, Google themselves have pushed the requirements of computer systems. When you're trying to build a system that scales to hundreds of thousands -- or millions -- of servers, it's no surprise that existing languages don't quite hit the spot.
Say they're only squeezing 40% of the max theoretical output from their server farm. If Go could push that utilization up to 60 or 70%... imagine the gains! For them, for us! This is even good news for the environment!
Of course, it's free to download and use, and there are tutorials that are very easy to get started with. There's even a little video showcasing just how fast it is, after the break.
So, just how good at time waster games are you? Think you've got the stuff? Well, The World's Hardest Game 2.0 doesn't think you do.
Yes, amazingly, it's possible to have a sequel to a game called "The World's Hardest Game". It doesn't seem logically possible, since if the first one was actually the world's hardest, how could another one come along and share the moniker? It made me doubt the name in the first place. That is, until I tried the game.
The mechanics of the game are very simple. You are a small red square, ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ZeRo said 10:06AM on 11-11-2009
how i wish, i had free time to enjoy it. Thanks for the news, perhaps when i have free time, I'll take a look at it.
Reply
Sebastian Anthony said 10:31AM on 11-11-2009
You and me both, brother! I'm a Python kiddie myself, and I love it... but I wish I had a little time to get my teeth stuck into this one as well!
Vash said 9:46PM on 11-11-2009
Python is VERY FUN, but whether Go is better remains to be seen. If I didn't have a C++ project on my belt at the moment I would try it right now.
Reply
btdown said 12:19PM on 11-11-2009
This is bullshit...looks just like c++. When is someone going to make a language easy enough for normal people to learn it and be productive? Fuck OOP.
Reply
MarkyB86 said 2:39PM on 11-11-2009
Fuckin' right.
OOP pisses me off!
Mike Smith said 5:40PM on 11-11-2009
Right, and why doesn't someone come up with a way to simplify bridge design so that anyone can design a bridge? There are simpler systems for building things, like LEGO and Meccano, but you wouldn't build a bridge out of those, would you?
Programming, serious programming anyway, is hard. A new programming language isn't going to change that. For the simple stuff, there are simpler scripting languages. For the complex stuff, the languages involved are necessarily going to be more complex.
Sebastian Anthony said 5:41PM on 11-11-2009
I think there are plenty of languages that work just fine without using object-orientation...!
Sebastian Anthony said 5:42PM on 11-11-2009
Mike -- I don't think the analogy is accurate.
It's more like... you CAN build a bridge from bricks, but if you can build it from tensile steel, why not? You can make it with less materials, quicker and thus cheaper...!
But yes, there's obviously the 'right' tool for most applications. This is obviously a systems-based language... for building systems!
HAL said 2:52AM on 11-12-2009
Besides looking like C++ this is actually nothing like C++. This is not even traditional OOP like Java, C#, or C++, there's no type hierarchy!
Sebastian Anthony said 7:03AM on 11-12-2009
Nice nickname, HAL.
Suitable...
dudericious said 6:51AM on 11-12-2009
1000 lines of code compile in under a second?
I should fucking hope so.
Morons.
Reply
Sebastian Anthony said 7:02AM on 11-12-2009
The second test was a little more impressive...!
Paul Carter Jr. said 1:03PM on 11-12-2009
Programming languages should have no restrictions, truly. In terms of making it simple? Can anyone make Calculus any simpler? It is what it is. How much can you water down something before it looses it's potency?
Google creating or adding or modifying existing languages into a new one is not surprising to me. It was only a matter of time and what is surprising that it took them this long. (smile) I think this was in the making for years, not yesterday.
This is an exciting day but the best is yet to some, which is even more exciting!!
Reply