3 ms·

Well, Go has excellent support for parallelism and excellent support for safety - whereas Rust actually supports parallelism with safety. Rust is also gaining

Well, Go has excellent support for parallelism and excellent support for safety - whereas Rust actually supports parallelism with safety. Rust is also gaining lots of useful "tweaks" that will make it quite a bit easier to get into in the future - and the syntax alone is a big draw to former Ruby, Python etc. programmers, while you really can't say the same about Go. Now, of course Rust is not for everything (some things really can't be done without efficient GC, and Go gives you that), but it looks like these Bitbucket users made a very solid choice here.

harikb 7y ago
> Author bio: Mohit Agrawal is a software developer from Indore, India and works at Oviyum Technologies, an outsourced product development firm Not sure why bitbucket is promoting this particular guest post.
reificator 7y ago
> it looks like the Bitbucket folks made a very solid choice here. Just a heads up, this is not from the bitbucket team. That's just where it's hosted.
apta 7y ago
> has excellent support for parallelism concurrency, not parallelism, and even there it doesn't have anything similar to immutable data structures or java.util.concurrent or System.Collections.Concurrent > support for safety Not more than any other available GC'd languages. > some things really can't be done without efficient GC, and Go gives you that Only if you care about pause times at the expense of throughput, and you don't have to deal with very large heaps