3 ms·
Article didn't convince me to think following arguments are wrong: * Go is a language stuck in the 70’s. * Go ignores 40 years of programming language researc
by EugeneOZ 11y ago
Article didn't convince me to think following arguments are wrong:
* Go is a language stuck in the 70’s.
* Go ignores 40 years of programming language research.
I tried to use Go and was shocked how they can use it without package manager, without generics, with so brittle concept of channels, with executable comments in code and with so authoritative model of taking decisions about language evolution.
So I still think criticism of Go is valid and authors are still deaf to it.
- RodgerTheGreat 11y agoI feel like the designers of Go tried to address criticism of C without considering any language designed after C. As a result there are improvements to some of the most egregious shortcomings of C (undefined behavior, a lack of basic reusable building-block data structures like lists and maps, crude build systems), but the subtler issues with C are still there. You still need to delicately route together error signals from every procedure which could fail. You still have a very limited ability to create new, reusable data structures. Common patterns are copied and pasted around your codebase because you have limited tools for abstraction and reuse. Go proponents claim it's simple. I'm more inclined to call it simplistic.
- ufo 11y agoWhat are executable comments?
- EugeneOZ 11y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9522973 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9522973