> Concurrency is hard. Maybe something like Erlang does it better, but compared the concurrency options in most popular languages, and the bugs that go along wi

> Concurrency is hard. Maybe something like Erlang does it better, but compared the concurrency options in most popular languages, and the bugs that go along with those options, I think I would far rather deal with them in Go. Concurrency isn't really that hard in Erlang, and Erlang isn't the only language that handles concurrency well. "Concurrency is hard" is usually paired with an implicit refusal to learn paradigms that make concurrency easier. Why are we only comparing Go to popular languages? When I first came across Go, before it was a popular language, I immediately started criticizing it because of the weak type system and ineffective concurrency model: I wanted the attention being given to Go to be given to a better language. Now I'm seeing the same people saying, "Okay, but the type system and concurrency are better than other popular languages." At face value, it makes sense to compare a popular language to other popular languages, but that logic breaks down because the only reason Go is popular is that a lot of people made the bad decision of choosing it before it was popular.