> it was (and is, IMHO) a better Python And in my opinion, it is a better Java. It succeeds in the niche where Java is used today: big softwares, shared by num

> it was (and is, IMHO) a better Python And in my opinion, it is a better Java. It succeeds in the niche where Java is used today: big softwares, shared by numbers of teams, working on different timezones and in different languages, and with varying degrees of skill. Go is so stubborn it takes the fun out of programming and ironically that's a good thing: when code can't be tied to anything personal, it is much more easily shared with anyone who works on it. I have found that writing Go itself is definitely tedious, sometimes boring, and the fun is not there; _however_, fun is had when you have a working binary that is statically compiled, reasonably devoid of bugs and surprisingly performant. You take joy in actually using pieces of software, not in fine-tuning your formatting rules. The language itself is boring, but it's the same boring for everyone and it happens to be working well so you tend to focus more on the solution than on the intricacies. This, IMO, is the success of Go