4 ms·

Python/Js are interpreted by default and not good system programming choices. Go is compiled. This comparison totally misses the mark. In fact Go was developed

Python/Js are interpreted by default and not good system programming choices. Go is compiled. This comparison totally misses the mark. In fact Go was developed mostly as C++ but sometimes Python replacement at Google.

omginternets 5y ago
It hits the mark because it targets the niche that was once occupied by interpreted languages.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  But it wasn't just "interpreted languages". Really the only interpreted languages in "the niche" were Python and a little bit of Ruby, but there was also a whole bunch of Java, C#, and C++.
KronisLV 5y ago
That's just one of the ways to think about it. Java, .NET (I felt like adding these two to expand on the comparison), Python and JS are all languages with a relatively high level of abstraction and large and useful ecosystems surrounding them. They're pretty popular for all sorts of application development, but all suffer from certain problems: - Java has lots of brittle reflection in some libraries and JDK can be finicky, especially with GC tuning - .NET needs a runtime, historically there's Mono, now there was .NET Core and now there will be just .NET, though in some cases there's also IL2CPP and so on - Python not only generally runs slow, but also has problematic package management, especially with vent - JS (Node in particular) has similar package management woes as well as really fast package deprecation Go at least partially solves some of those problems, by being compiled, having decent performance, somewhat rich ecosystem and passable package management, all while the language remains usable. Lots of applications and some tools will get written in Go because of this, because it's pretty reasonable to use in most cases. In comparison, C, C++, Zig and Rust would all be better suited for systems level programming or embedded development - they typically let you write more performant and less memory hungry code, at the expense of foot guns and slower development.
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  GC tuning is painful, but it’s quicker and more reliable than rewriting code hoping for same result.
  - KronisLV 5y ago
    Partially agreed, many times it's just a patch over a codebase that's stuck only running on JDK 8 - people expect tuning to be sufficient when the code is slowly rotting. I'd argue that most systems that won't die out eventually will need a rewrite, or alternatively, in the modern day we'll see more and more polyglotic systems popping up. Therefore it always makes sense to explore the best options for a particular bit of development, regardless of whether it's Node, Python, Java, Go or something else.
- kcartlidge 5y ago
  I do both C# and Go so have no axe to grind here. Just two small points though. > .NET needs a runtime It doesn't. With a single command .NET Core can produce stand-alone single-file cross-platform deployables needing no SDK, Framework, runtime, or other dependency on the server. > Go at least partially solves some of those problems, by being compiled, having decent performance, somewhat rich ecosystem and passable package management, all while the language remains usable. It does, and I've been a big fan of Go for a fair few years now. However every point made in that sentence applies equally to .NET too. The one area where Go beats C# (and most others) hands-down for me is the build time. It's a whole order of magnitude (possibly several) faster than most alternatives.
- asadawadia 5y ago
  >systems level programming or embedded development Like building what?
atombender 5y ago
And yet Go seems to have not captured many C++ developers, but rather developers from languages like Python, Ruby, and JavaScript. The Go team originally wanted to replace C++, especially inside Google, but they didn't succeed. According to googlers on Hacker News, very few projects inside Google actually use Go. The reason Go attracted these kinds of developers is precisely that it isn't a systems programming language. Systems people want something like Rust instead.
- dilyevsky 5y ago
  It def convinced me. I wrote c++ for almost 10 year before switching to Go. Even after c++11 have come out it was still night and day. Anecdotally the team i left at google rewrote some of my stuff from c++ in Go that I didn’t get to at the time
  - _wldu 5y ago
    Same experience here. 10 years ago, I wrote a lot of C++, today I write almost exclusively Go.
- vp8989 5y ago
  "The Go team originally wanted to replace C++, especially inside Google" Im glad you said that and I was not just imagining that myself. I remember following the Go language closely in its earlier days and it was often spoken about as a "systems language" but it actually seems to have ended up settling as a language to write servers for people who are sick of OOP but still like their imperative C style code.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Lack of generics kept most of us away. You don't return to 1992 C++, thinking nah this is fine. Companies like F-Secure are using Go for real system programming just fine. https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory
  - dilyevsky 5y ago

omginternets 5y ago

It hits the mark because it targets the niche that was once occupied by interpreted languages.

throwaway894345 5y ago
But it wasn't just "interpreted languages". Really the only interpreted languages in "the niche" were Python and a little bit of Ruby, but there was also a whole bunch of Java, C#, and C++.

KronisLV 5y ago

That's just one of the ways to think about it. Java, .NET (I felt like adding these two to expand on the comparison), Python and JS are all languages with a relatively high level of abstraction and large and useful ecosystems surrounding them. They're pretty popular for all sorts of application development, but all suffer from certain problems: - Java has lots of brittle reflection in some libraries and JDK can be finicky, especially with GC tuning - .NET needs a runtime, historically there's Mono, now there was .NET Core and now there will be just .NET, though in some cases there's also IL2CPP and so on - Python not only generally runs slow, but also has problematic package management, especially with vent - JS (Node in particular) has similar package management woes as well as really fast package deprecation Go at least partially solves some of those problems, by being compiled, having decent performance, somewhat rich ecosystem and passable package management, all while the language remains usable. Lots of applications and some tools will get written in Go because of this, because it's pretty reasonable to use in most cases. In comparison, C, C++, Zig and Rust would all be better suited for systems level programming or embedded development - they typically let you write more performant and less memory hungry code, at the expense of foot guns and slower development.

erik_seaberg 5y ago
GC tuning is painful, but it’s quicker and more reliable than rewriting code hoping for same result.
- KronisLV 5y ago
  Partially agreed, many times it's just a patch over a codebase that's stuck only running on JDK 8 - people expect tuning to be sufficient when the code is slowly rotting. I'd argue that most systems that won't die out eventually will need a rewrite, or alternatively, in the modern day we'll see more and more polyglotic systems popping up. Therefore it always makes sense to explore the best options for a particular bit of development, regardless of whether it's Node, Python, Java, Go or something else.
kcartlidge 5y ago
I do both C# and Go so have no axe to grind here. Just two small points though. > .NET needs a runtime It doesn't. With a single command .NET Core can produce stand-alone single-file cross-platform deployables needing no SDK, Framework, runtime, or other dependency on the server. > Go at least partially solves some of those problems, by being compiled, having decent performance, somewhat rich ecosystem and passable package management, all while the language remains usable. It does, and I've been a big fan of Go for a fair few years now. However every point made in that sentence applies equally to .NET too. The one area where Go beats C# (and most others) hands-down for me is the build time. It's a whole order of magnitude (possibly several) faster than most alternatives.
asadawadia 5y ago
>systems level programming or embedded development Like building what?

atombender 5y ago

And yet Go seems to have not captured many C++ developers, but rather developers from languages like Python, Ruby, and JavaScript. The Go team originally wanted to replace C++, especially inside Google, but they didn't succeed. According to googlers on Hacker News, very few projects inside Google actually use Go. The reason Go attracted these kinds of developers is precisely that it isn't a systems programming language. Systems people want something like Rust instead.

dilyevsky 5y ago
It def convinced me. I wrote c++ for almost 10 year before switching to Go. Even after c++11 have come out it was still night and day. Anecdotally the team i left at google rewrote some of my stuff from c++ in Go that I didn’t get to at the time
- _wldu 5y ago
  Same experience here. 10 years ago, I wrote a lot of C++, today I write almost exclusively Go.
vp8989 5y ago
"The Go team originally wanted to replace C++, especially inside Google" Im glad you said that and I was not just imagining that myself. I remember following the Go language closely in its earlier days and it was often spoken about as a "systems language" but it actually seems to have ended up settling as a language to write servers for people who are sick of OOP but still like their imperative C style code.
pjmlp 5y ago
Lack of generics kept most of us away. You don't return to 1992 C++, thinking nah this is fine. Companies like F-Secure are using Go for real system programming just fine. https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory
- dilyevsky 5y ago