4 ms·
Users are overwhelmingly happy with Go: they agree that they would recommend Go to others by a ratio of 19:1, that they’d prefer to use Go for their next projec
by zigzigzag 10y ago
Users are overwhelmingly happy with Go: they agree that they would recommend Go to others by a ratio of 19:1, that they’d prefer to use Go for their next project (14:1), and that Go is working well for their teams (18:1).
Hmm. That's some great results, but is that survey representative of Go users as a whole? The respondents are self-selected, right?
I can imagine such a survey is reliable for things like best/worst features, how the language is used and other things that probably aren't correlated with enthusiasm for the language. Simply asking people who already chose to do a survey whether they like the language or not seems kind of pointless: if they didn't they'd presumably not bother spending time to say they didn't.
It is however illuminating how many of Go's developers are attracted by simplicity. The top adjectives for "like most" are: simplicity, easy, concurrency, simple, fast.
So that's 3 of the top 5 things people name basically being "it is simple".
On the other hand, the top "improve the most" adjective is generics.
This appears to put Go in a somewhat awkward spot. There's clearly a large population of developers who have been left behind by static typing and its consequent complexity (generics in particular being a fertile source of confusing error messages in most languages), and Go caters to these people, hence its attraction to former dynamic language users.
But at the same time, people are saying they want more complexity in the form of generics. If Go were to add good generics would it really be any simpler than Java? I'd struggle to identify any major complexity gap between them after that, unless you consider OOP to be too complex (unlikely given the Python/JavaScript backgrounds of many Go users?).
I wonder if it's the same people giving the top answers. Are Go users split into those who are happy with its current level of complexity and others who chafe against it? If so, is it possible for them to satisfy both camps simultaneously?
- grey-area 10y agoThis is an interesting idea, it is quite a heterogenous community, which means there are definitely different schools of thought coming from entirely different backgrounds. I'm quite happy with the slow progress/lack of changes, to me that's a feature.