| > So what? C10k isn't a hard thing to do on the JVM It is using the traditional threading model, which is all it had before NIO came along. > Your point is ...? My point is if Scala's synchronous API was compatible/built on an event based system or green threads, then the far less attractive callback based API would not exist. Just like Go doesn't have callbacks...what would be the point? > Use the right tool for the job. Go doesn't claim to be good at everything. If you want great traditional multi-threading then by all means use Java. If you want a highly-scalable network engine with code that doesn't look like spaghetti, use Go. > The lack of developers which run around and try to tell everyone that they found the silver bullet for solving concurrency in Scala is a sign of a mature community I don't don't hear many Java programmers running around complaining about hand-editing reams of XML either...I still don't envy them. > Claiming “A is the best, because B is even worse” just shows a complete lack of knowledge of existing solutions. I don't think Go is "best", and I already gave you examples of other synchronous, event-based languages (you still haven't shown me an example in Java/Scala). I actually prefer Python/Gevent for most things. > Do your research instead of claiming blatantly false things. Well I think the onus is on you to provide some evidence to back up your claims. |
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6125567
http://jim-mcbeath.blogspot.com/2010/08/delimited-continuati...
https://github.com/jimmc/scoroutine - some of the examples in this are godawful, but you'll find that they still work if you rewrite them to be legible.