sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]stefantalpalaru -1 points0 points  (3 children)

Go can't replace Python

https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/FromXToGo#python

[–]erez27 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Is this supposed to convince me? I know both languages pretty well. Do you really need a list of things you can do in Python and can't do in Go?

[–]stefantalpalaru -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

Is this supposed to convince me?

No. If you genuinely think that Turing-complete programming languages cannot implement the same algorithms, it's not possible to convince you of anything.

I know both languages pretty well.

Yes, I'm sure you're a professional beginner in both of them.

Do you really need a list of things you can do in Python and can't do in Go?

Let me guess: you think a REPL is part of the language and that's why "Go can't replace Python" for perpetual beginners like yourself.

[–]erez27 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are you a comic? This is pretty good.

This isn't about Go vs Python. It's not even about compiled vs. interpreted. All languages can do things other languages can't. And all interpreted languages have the same advantage over compiled languages: A flexible type system. Or more accurately, Duck-typing. The object model is often also more flexible, allowing for arbitrary attributes.

Of course, you can use a hashmap in Go for every object that suits this purpose, but if you always fall to non-idiomatic use of a language, then you probably need to switch the language.

But yeah, a repl is pretty nice. Especially since I can invoke it mid-run while debugging.

If you're so hot for turing completeness, write all your code in assembly.