Why dont the Go team do golang2 now..
There are a few issues.. already mentioned in open fire chat this year 2013..
Would be nicer to actually recongise flaws now.. and offer alternative.. even faster tht python 3000 could ?
Thats whats in my mind.. and fix the the documentation so the classes interlink and it a bit of a java/md/rst/doc style..
> Why dont the Go team do golang2 now.. There are a few issues..
I suspect that it is because Go 1 (issues and all) is useful enough that people are making productive use of it, and they'd like to flush out more of the issues that may exist -- and give more time for different approaches to those issues to be tried in experimental forks and, where possible, libraries, preprocessers, etc.
> and fix the the documentation so the classes interlink
Not sure what this means, and Go doesn't have classes. (Its not just an issue of calling classes different names, it divides up functionality differently than class-based OO systems -- packages are in a sense like classes [they are the closest equivalent to the function of classes as containers of static methods], structs are a bit like classes [in the role of containing members, and in that anonymous embedding approximates inheritance], every type is a bit like classes [in that any type can have methods attached to it, so long as they are attached in the same package as the type is defined]; but all these things are also unlike classes in various ways, too.)
Thats whats in my mind.. and fix the the documentation so the classes interlink and it a bit of a java/md/rst/doc style..