3 ms·

Why do you think that? I like it's stripped-down feature set, and opinionated concurrency (although it's occasionally clunky). It's not perfect, and could hav

by hazz99 8y ago

Why do you think that? I like it's stripped-down feature set, and opinionated concurrency (although it's occasionally clunky). It's not perfect, and could have a lot more support for concurrency, but it's very workable and a joy to program in.

umanwizard 8y ago
My personal problem with Go is that it doesn’t fit in any niche. If you want language optimized for productivity with a lot of high-level features, use Python. If you want maximum performance and low-level control, use C++ (or C, or Rust). If you need relatively high performance but can tolerate it not being 100% in exchange for nice things like GC, use Java. Where does Go fit?
- mbo 8y ago
  If we're being serious here, I'm pretty sure Go is specifically for very very large orgs and almost no-one else. Go optimises for low GC pause time, fast compile times and in-your-face concurrency at the expense of almost everything else. The fact that CSP is formalised and well studied, and the lang itself is sufficiently C-like and stripped down makes it amenable to large scale static analysis as well.
- jazoom 8y ago
  If you need relatively high performance but can tolerate it not being 100% in exchange for nice things like GC, use Go. Where does Java fit in?
  - umanwizard 8y ago
    Java has existed for dramatically longer than Go and is extremely well-supported, both in terms of the core language and the tooling ecosystem. You need a good reason to get rid of the incumbent, it's not just arbitrary.
    - jazoom 8y ago
      IMO there are plenty of reasons for me not to use Java. I could write an essay on it, but the only one that really matters is that for the 4 years that I coded in Java, I didn't enjoy it. And to suggest Go doesn't offer anything different to Java is just silly.
      - noncoml 8y ago
        Curious, what does it offer other than the goroutines and the native compilation?
vmchale 8y ago
> I like it's stripped-down feature set How could the absence of sum types possibly be a good thing?

by hazz99 8y ago

umanwizard 8y ago

My personal problem with Go is that it doesn’t fit in any niche. If you want language optimized for productivity with a lot of high-level features, use Python. If you want maximum performance and low-level control, use C++ (or C, or Rust). If you need relatively high performance but can tolerate it not being 100% in exchange for nice things like GC, use Java. Where does Go fit?

mbo 8y ago
If we're being serious here, I'm pretty sure Go is specifically for very very large orgs and almost no-one else. Go optimises for low GC pause time, fast compile times and in-your-face concurrency at the expense of almost everything else. The fact that CSP is formalised and well studied, and the lang itself is sufficiently C-like and stripped down makes it amenable to large scale static analysis as well.
jazoom 8y ago
If you need relatively high performance but can tolerate it not being 100% in exchange for nice things like GC, use Go. Where does Java fit in?
- umanwizard 8y ago
  Java has existed for dramatically longer than Go and is extremely well-supported, both in terms of the core language and the tooling ecosystem. You need a good reason to get rid of the incumbent, it's not just arbitrary.
  - jazoom 8y ago
    IMO there are plenty of reasons for me not to use Java. I could write an essay on it, but the only one that really matters is that for the 4 years that I coded in Java, I didn't enjoy it. And to suggest Go doesn't offer anything different to Java is just silly.
    - noncoml 8y ago
      Curious, what does it offer other than the goroutines and the native compilation?

vmchale 8y ago

> I like it's stripped-down feature set How could the absence of sum types possibly be a good thing?