Other comments have claimed that Go is intended for teams, but my personal experience shows that Go code is easier to maintain than Haskell code, even for a sin

Other comments have claimed that Go is intended for teams, but my personal experience shows that Go code is easier to maintain than Haskell code, even for a single developer. Though I've coded with Haskell for many years, I never reached an expert level. So, when I went back to an application after 6 month of break, my Haskell skills were rusty, and I struggled to understand what I had written. What's that pragma `MultiParamTypeClasses, TypeFamilies`? What does `<*>` mean in that context? And so on. A similar break happened last year, and I still had a hard time getting back to fluent Haskell, while modifying my Go code was still easy. Still, I agree with some of the bad points. Like him, I would have liked more types with a stricter compiler that helps refactoring (sum types, zero values). The official documentation of the language is also very disappointing, as noted by Eric S. Raymond in his conversion notes[^1] from Python to Go. The author of this blog post criticizes the tooling for the lacks of features that in fact do exist[^2], but are hard to find due to the poor documentation (split over a a shallow "tour of Go", blogs, other official docs, with no links between them). [^1]: https://gitlab.com/esr/reposurgeon/blob/master/GoNotes.adoc https://gitlab.com/esr/reposurgeon/blob/master/GoNotes.adoc [^2]: https://golang.org/pkg/runtime/trace/ https://golang.org/pkg/runtime/trace/