<p><a href="http://pca.st/lT7W">http://pca.st/lT7W</a></p>
<hr/>**评论：**<br/><br/>Fwippy: <pre><p>Node isn't a language.</p></pre>evilmaus: <pre><p>But it is an attempt to bring JavaScript out of the browser.</p></pre>tonymonmaster: <pre><p>Godamn man, thank you for saying this. Everyone that's like. 'develop on Java, Ruby, Python, C#...Node' I just want to scream at and remind them that node is not a language. Just like NET Is not a fucking language...they're frameworks. </p></pre>i-dontevenseethecode: <pre><p>I listened to this interview. Now this is always my argument when people start debate using node or not. I'm like "well you know the maker of node says he'd rather use go"</p></pre>LadyDascalie: <pre><p>I've never understood people who compare them at all, to me it just makes no sense, as the languages and ecosystems are so completely different.</p></pre>the-kontra: <pre><p>They are indeed different, but they both can be used to create similar applications. </p></pre>LadyDascalie: <pre><p>I understand that, but I don't think that's particularly important.
You could also use PHP or Ruby, or Lisp for that matter.</p>
<p>Just because the problem domain overlaps does not mean that there is enough to compare those languages to each other.</p>
<p>Features and applications of the language, absolutely, that's fair game, but I refer more to people who use arguments like Language A is better than Language B because it has feature X.</p>
<p>All I'm saying is I believe that this is not enough to make a case for or against either.</p></pre>the-kontra: <pre><blockquote>
<p>Just because the problem domain overlaps does not mean that there is enough to compare those languages to each other.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But it's enough for people to have dilemmas which one to choose. And the fact that this dilemma is fairly common is - in my opinion - enough to compare those languages to each other ;)</p>
<p>And I don't mean strictly comparing features etc., but rather comparing more general things like the ecosystem, reliability, possible applications, pros and cons.</p></pre>LadyDascalie: <pre><p>That’s fair, I think you’re right.
Sometimes, arguments about languages devolve into holy wars, and that’s more what I referencing, but I think I didn’t formulate my own thoughts well enough.</p></pre>jerf: <pre><p>The claimed strengths of Node, the reason that you were nominally supposed to choose Node over Python or Perl or Ruby, are things that are much better served by Go. (With the exception of "isomorphic code", i.e., the ability to run the same language on both client and server, which has always been and remains a very marginal affair, with a handful of people swearing by it, but most people who try it apparently give it up fairly quickly.)</p>
<p>There may be reasons to choose Node <em>other</em> than the strengths claimed by the propaganda, but in terms of what the Node team explicitly positioned it as, Go is a better choice.</p></pre>brianvoe: <pre><p>"if you’re building a server, I can’t imagine using anything other than Go"</p></pre>flatMapds: <pre><p>I don't know about that, like if we are talking about making something that just has to handle many persistent connections ie c10k, or can accept open start stop a lot of connections quickly, Go is really great, when we begin dealing with complex control plane issues Go in of itself is meh, granted it's remedied by the shitload of libraries for such problems, but it sucks when you are the guy writing those libraries, particularly doing so in a reusable manner. </p>
<p>Like, for example I was writing a set of behaviors, using nothing but the std lib and a consistent hashing library, which I admit it's stlib is one of my favorites I've seen in a lang, one was a relay service for anonymous http communications, a p2p file store, a distributed membership tracker, and a job dispatcher for the overlay network, writing the proof of concept was pretty simple, debugging it and making it modular was a nightmare. </p>
<p>Honestly my opinion on Go is it's pretty fucking convenient, but because it's so convenient, people often use it for things that it isn't the right tool for. </p>
<p>Honestly, the only reason why Go isn't one of my mains anymore, is it's not very modular, but it gives the illusion of modularity. </p>
<p>On the topic of langs, that are great for servers, particularly in the area of complex coordination, Ocaml + C, Erlang + C, Scala is good if you are willing to work with netty. </p>
<p>Before you talk shit about Ocamls multicore problems, node has a GIL too, Ocaml + Lwt | Async's story there is similar to nodes but significantly better, and recently it's official multicore facilities became usable, and it's had 3rd party multicore support via message passing for ages albeit not as good as Go's or Erlang.</p></pre>__ek: <pre><p>What do you mean by illusion of modularity?</p></pre>SupersonicSpitfire: <pre><p>What are your thoughts on Crystal, Clojure, Cython and Grumpy for solving similar problems? And do you prefer Reason and Elixir over OCaml and Erlang?</p></pre>kostix: <pre><p><a href="https://www.mappingthejourney.com/single-post/2017/08/31/episode-8-interview-with-ryan-dahl-creator-of-nodejs/" rel="nofollow">Here</a> is it present with the text attached.</p></pre>ramzgt: <pre><p>But these are entirely different things...</p></pre>
