4 ms·
It's possible that a huge marketing advantage kept people interested long enough to come to appreciate the benefits of the langauge's basic nature.
by catach 7y ago
It's possible that a huge marketing advantage kept people interested long enough to come to appreciate the benefits of the langauge's basic nature.
- weberc2 7y agoI was drawn to Go because it was the only language at the time (or the only one I came across) that allowed me to build and package software without learning a domain specific language and imperatively stitching together my own build system (looking at you, CMake and Gradle). Basically I want to focus on writing my program, not writing programs to build my program. Go let me run “go build”, and everything Just Worked. It has since become a little more complicated with the introduction of modules, but still vastly better than C++, Java, or Python.
- dev_dull 7y agoThe building and deploying of Go code is refreshingly easy.
- gigatexal 7y agoI came to Go when modules had been released and found it much easier to understand than GOPATH style workflows. I guess to each their own. I agree, go build, and go distribution is so awesome.
- weberc2 7y agoI’m not opposed to modules; there are just some odd edge cases that have given me trouble; probably the error messaging just needs to be improved.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoI see very little marketing for Go. Compare, for example, to C# when in came out, or Java when it did.
- fortran77 7y agoDid C# have actual "advertising" outside of msdn publications? It came out in 2000 and I don't recall seeing C# ads. (Print publications were out then.) I picked it up early on and still use it (and F#) today. I've written a lot of custom desktop applications in it.
- pjmlp 7y agoYes, The C/C++ Users Journal, DrDobbs, PC World, and Computer Shopper run articles on it. It was actually released in 2001. Unless you are speaking about the alphas that MSFT Certified Partners had access to.
- fortran77 7y agoThey ran articles, of course, but were there "advertisements?" These were publications writing about a major company's major new effort. There's no advertising today, either. What happens is (for example) Rust/Mozilla foundation's people set out to make every thread on every popular forum about Rust.
- pjmlp 7y agoAny kind of press is an "advertisement". That is why people that write about technology are called advocates.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoIt is my impression (from 18 years later!) that there was a difference. The articles about C#, back in the day, were kind of frustrating to a programmer (or at least to me). There were a lot of words, a lot of description, but not many details (as a programmer would recognize them). The articles were more written for managers than for programmers. That's marketing. (Or so it seems to me. It could be, however, that 18 years ago, I lacked the depth to see the details that were there.) In contrast, Go's "marketing" is much more aimed at programmers. It's got programmer-level details. It's not trying to sell your manager on the language. > What happens is (for example) Rust/Mozilla foundation's people set out to make every thread on every popular forum about Rust. I completely disagree with this characterization.