← Back to context

Comment by krmboya

15 hours ago

Is it correct to say Golang is bringing Limbo to the masses?

Partially, Go still doesn't support a few Limbo features.

However the influence is quite clear, plus the Oberon-2 style methods and SYSTEM package.

No, it's bringing Aleph to the masses. Limbo is a cousin, and Dis was certainly very interesting and something I wish had caught on.

  • Aleph lacked GC, which Rob Pike considered the main reason for its implementation failure on Plan 9, and initially bounds checking was also missing.

    Two key design difference from Go and its two predecessors.

    Dis is an implementation detail, Go could offer the same dynamism with AOT toolchain, as proven by other languages with ahead of time toolchains available.

That might be Rust, actually. They have more in common with thoughts about type systems, built-in constructs, deterministic memory usage, etc.

Limbo looks more like Go on the concurrency front, but that was inherited from Alef/Plan 9. That wasn't what Limbo brought to the table.

  • Limbo uses a garbage collector, though.

    • So does Rust. Rust is 'smarter' than Limbo, in that it can avoid using its GC in a lot of cases (but not all, hence why it still has GC to fall back on when necessary), but, I mean, that discovery was the reason for why Rust was created. Limbo was already there otherwise. Every new language needs to try to add something into the mix.

      Still, the thoughts were in common, even though the final solution didn't end up being exactly the same.

      4 replies →