This is why I love Go. Nobody was asking for this, but they took the time to do it right and continue to Push go as a memory safe, high-level systems language.
That does not make sense to me. Go is memory-safe, but it does not guarantee data-race freedom.So whats your point here? Haskell?
> That does not make sense to me.You said that because you assumed Go is memory-safe in all conditions.> Go is memory-safeYes, but only if there's no data race.Go is not like Java. Java doesn't guarantee no data race, but when it happens, it's still memory-safe.
Neither Java or Go guarantees data-race freedom. A data race does not by itself make ordinary Java or Go code memory-unsafe in the C/C++ sense.I fail to see how a racy Java program is more memory safe than a racy Go program?
u8 · · focus · HN ↗
__s · · focus · HN ↗
shikck200 · · focus · HN ↗
So whats your point here? Haskell?
beltsazar · · focus · HN ↗
You said that because you assumed Go is memory-safe in all conditions.
> Go is memory-safe
Yes, but only if there's no data race.
Go is not like Java. Java doesn't guarantee no data race, but when it happens, it's still memory-safe.
shikck200 · · focus · HN ↗
I fail to see how a racy Java program is more memory safe than a racy Go program?
__s · · focus · HN ↗