The naming similarity is unfortunate. However, there are many computing
products and services named Go. In the 11 months since our release, there
has been minimal confusion of the two languages, so we are closing this
生产力时代。1990年代以来主要是如何增进编程生产率的时代，这个时代出现了很多framework，代码库，以及快速开发的IDE，很多公司都在这个时期致力于这些增进生率的工作，如：delphi, power builder, MFC，boost等等。但最重要的还是因为引入了虚拟机——WORA（Write Once, Run Anywhere），JVM 是这方面的代表作。之后的.NET整出来的那些东西都是。今天的JPython, JRuby等都是为整合开发效率和维护效率。参看《基于JVM的语言正在开始流行》
Yes. STL is not object oriented. I think that object orientedness is almost as much of a hoax as Artificial Intelligence. I have yet to see an interesting piece of code that comes from these OO people. In a sense, I am unfair to AI: I learned a lot of stuff from the MIT AI Lab crowd, they have done some really fundamental work: Bill Gosper’s Hakmem is one of the best things for a programmer to read. AI might not have had a serious foundation, but it produced Gosper and Stallman (Emacs), Moses (Macsyma) and Sussman (Scheme, together with Guy Steele). I find OOP technically unsound. It attempts to decompose the world in terms of interfaces that vary on a single type. To deal with the real problems you need multisorted algebras – families of interfaces that span multiple types. I find OOP philosophically unsound. It claims that everything is an object. Even if it is true it is not very interesting – saying that everything is an object is saying nothing at all. I find OOP methodologically wrong. It starts with classes. It is as if mathematicians would start with axioms. You do not start with axioms – you start with proofs. Only when you have found a bunch of related proofs, can you come up with axioms. You end with axioms. The same thing is true in programming: you have to start with interesting algorithms. Only when you understand them well, can you come up with an interface that will let them work.