3 ms·

You haven't laid out any concrete selling points for Go over Haskell or Java beyond "I dislike all of them". Can you come up with any intellectual rather than

You haven't laid out any concrete selling points for Go over Haskell or Java beyond "I dislike all of them". Can you come up with any intellectual rather than emotional reason for preferring Go?

geoka9 10y ago
I can open a standard library definition and quickly understand what it does. If I try to do that with Scala or Java, my eyes just glaze over. With Go I often don't notice when I venture outside of my own program and into 3rd party library code.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  It sounds like you just didn't out in the work to learn Haskell. The docs are fantastic, but they do assume you are willing to get over the learning curve. I don't think you are really disagreeing with me - go does nothing new, just lower learning curve.
  - geoka9 10y ago
    That's the problem, there's no getting over the learning curve when it comes to languages like Scala or Haskell. While you do get more proficient with time, you never get to the state where the language gets out of the way and becomes your friend instead of something you have to wrestle most of the time to enjoy the benefits it offers (which are also offered by Go, BTW). I was disagreeing with your original statement, Go is not just a faster python.
    - codygman 10y ago
      > That's the problem, there's no getting over the learning curve when it comes to languages like Scala or Haskell. How did you come to this conclusion? Based on your own experiences? If so, why do you find it reasonable to assert your anecdotal truth generally? > enjoy the benefits it offers (which are also offered by Go, BTW). Are you seriously saying Go offers the entirety of features that Haskell offers. So what, you think people are just using Haskell for no real reason?
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > That's the problem, there's no getting over the learning curve when it comes to languages like Scala or Haskell For you, maybe. For plenty of others, that's clearly not true. > While you do get more proficient with time, you never get to the state where the language gets out of the way and becomes your friend instead of something you have to wrestle most of the time to enjoy the benefits it offers (which are also offered by Go, BTW) Go offers weaker type-safety benefits that Java (with the benefit of less type-safety ceremony), much less Scala or Haskell (against which it has less ceremony benefit, because Haskell and Scala have reduced ceremony with stronger type systems). Go doesn't offer the benefits Haskell or Scala (or Rust) do. OTOH, some people find it more intuitive, and it does offer different benefits which may be more relevant to some use cases. The sweet spot for Go seems to be the place where, before Go, you might use Python but be upset about performance and might use C but be upset about boilerplate; Go improves over the weaknesses of either on that border, while preserving most (but not necessarily all) of their strengths. > Go isn't just a faster Python. Faster (and more parallel) Python, less obtrusive C, lower ceremony and more native Java -- it's not just any of these, but they sort of capture its primary strengths.
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      Thanks for providing an anecdote which 100% supports the claim I made: that all Go provides is an inferior language that appeals to people who don't wish to learn new things.

You haven't laid out any concrete selling points for Go over Haskell or Java beyond "I dislike all of them". Can you come up with any intellectual rather than emotional reason for preferring Go?

geoka9 10y ago

I can open a standard library definition and quickly understand what it does. If I try to do that with Scala or Java, my eyes just glaze over. With Go I often don't notice when I venture outside of my own program and into 3rd party library code.

yummyfajitas 10y ago
It sounds like you just didn't out in the work to learn Haskell. The docs are fantastic, but they do assume you are willing to get over the learning curve. I don't think you are really disagreeing with me - go does nothing new, just lower learning curve.
- geoka9 10y ago
  That's the problem, there's no getting over the learning curve when it comes to languages like Scala or Haskell. While you do get more proficient with time, you never get to the state where the language gets out of the way and becomes your friend instead of something you have to wrestle most of the time to enjoy the benefits it offers (which are also offered by Go, BTW). I was disagreeing with your original statement, Go is not just a faster python.
  - codygman 10y ago
    > That's the problem, there's no getting over the learning curve when it comes to languages like Scala or Haskell. How did you come to this conclusion? Based on your own experiences? If so, why do you find it reasonable to assert your anecdotal truth generally? > enjoy the benefits it offers (which are also offered by Go, BTW). Are you seriously saying Go offers the entirety of features that Haskell offers. So what, you think people are just using Haskell for no real reason?
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > That's the problem, there's no getting over the learning curve when it comes to languages like Scala or Haskell For you, maybe. For plenty of others, that's clearly not true. > While you do get more proficient with time, you never get to the state where the language gets out of the way and becomes your friend instead of something you have to wrestle most of the time to enjoy the benefits it offers (which are also offered by Go, BTW) Go offers weaker type-safety benefits that Java (with the benefit of less type-safety ceremony), much less Scala or Haskell (against which it has less ceremony benefit, because Haskell and Scala have reduced ceremony with stronger type systems). Go doesn't offer the benefits Haskell or Scala (or Rust) do. OTOH, some people find it more intuitive, and it does offer different benefits which may be more relevant to some use cases. The sweet spot for Go seems to be the place where, before Go, you might use Python but be upset about performance and might use C but be upset about boilerplate; Go improves over the weaknesses of either on that border, while preserving most (but not necessarily all) of their strengths. > Go isn't just a faster Python. Faster (and more parallel) Python, less obtrusive C, lower ceremony and more native Java -- it's not just any of these, but they sort of capture its primary strengths.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Thanks for providing an anecdote which 100% supports the claim I made: that all Go provides is an inferior language that appeals to people who don't wish to learn new things.