Re: what is the best language for go: Re: [computer-go]Scoreestimating

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxx>]

I think they are both great languages.  I can't imagine someone liking
one and hating the other or even disliking it a little.

Someone said this:

  >>I'm not sure why it wouldn't be OK for bigger programs (ie. a Go program) 
  >>as long as you're prepared to live with dynamic typing and code up plenty 
  >>of Unit tests. 

Whoever wrote this  doesn't quite get it.  Ruby  and Python are better
for  for BIG projects  and was  designed for  this.  Much  better than
lower level languages than Java or C++ etc.

The unit tests  is not more necessary in  ruby/python than these other
languages, it's LESS  needed, but it should be  done.  You will always
get better  results in any  language by testing  as you go  and making
yourself go slow to be thorough.

Ruby is  strict about types which  is the more  important thing.  It's
not  STATICALLY typed but  it is  strictly typed.   You cannot  add an
integer and a string, for instance, like you can in perl.

Unless python  has changed, it doesn't  hide data very  well.  Ruby is
way ahead unless python has fixed this, but Ruby always had it right.

- Don







   I think this computer language discussion is probably stretching the 
   patience of people whose main interest here is computer Go so I'll try to 
   make this my last post on the topic :-)

   >>Regarding Mark's question about large scale development: I'm not sure how 
   >>Ruby would fare there.  It has pretty decent OO features (better than 
   >>Python IMHO) which should help.  My biggest Ruby program to date is only 
   >>about 500 lines and it is certainly fine for anything of that size.
   >
   >I really go back to read the Ruby OO features, I did not found anything 
   >that don't exist in python. Maybe you can give me good pointers on web.

   The things I didn't like about Python's OO were:
   - lack of private and protected instance variables
   - having to use an explicit 'self' parameter in all methods

   Note that I'm not saying Python is a bad language, just that I personally 
   didn't like it much.  I'm sure that lots of people do wonderful things with 
   Python.  I'm equally sure that a sizeable bunch of people will prefer Ruby.

   cheers,
   Peter

   >
   >>I'm not sure why it wouldn't be OK for bigger programs (ie. a Go program) 
   >>as long as you're prepared to live with dynamic typing and code up plenty 
   >>of Unit tests.  I'd still see it as potentially much more productive than 
   >>C++ or Java.  I agree that speed would be an issue - if you do a serious 
   >>Go program in it I'm guessing you'd want to re-implement the critical 
   >>parts in C once they've stablised.
   >
   >I'm sure that Python can manage such programs.
   >For that there is a similar paquages as in java,
   >but the import system is even more powerful than java one.
   >
   >Personnaly I know Python only since six month
   >and I already made a full working application (even if not finish)
   >which has 888 lignes wich is perfectly extensible and stable.
   >It includes: configuration, special ftp client, language source detection
   >C code processing, batch compilation (with system ("gcc ") calls)
   >
   >Biggest aplications full works.
   >mailman  (mail list manager) 33 000 lignes of code.
   >Zope (web server and web development environemnt) 403 000 lignes of code.
   >
   >And the point is to realize the same functionnality,
   >the code is *really* shorter than java or C++.
   >For exemple, in my project, with the help of introspection,
   >I parsed a file, transform it into a full working Python object,
   >add one simple unittest, all in one file of 79 lines.
   >As far as I remember how I worked in java, I would expect
   >that the same job in java would require at least three
   >classes (one file for each) 80 lines each.
   >That's why I rely believe that Python is three times more productive
   >than java (even including the learning stage)
   >
   >So I don't think that big project in Python is an issue
   >The integration with C is easy (but not tested personnally)
   >
   >So I think it meets better the requirements of go application
   >than C or java. Maybe Lisp is even better, but I know very
   >little about lisp, except that it is harder to learn.
   >
   >Xavier
   >
   >
   >_______________________________________________
   >computer-go mailing list
   >computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

   _________________________________________________________________
   There’s never been a better time to get Xtra JetStream @  
   http://xtra.co.nz/jetstream

   _______________________________________________
   computer-go mailing list
   computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/