6 ms·

So why did we need go when Java already existed?

matthewmacleod 5y ago
Because they're two different languages, tackling different problems, with entirely different sets of benefits and costs associated with their use.
- google234123 5y ago
  That’s not enough to justify the (10s, 100?) millions of dollars of investment. Java is faster and safe and can do everything go can do. C++ can be even faster (at least there are no pauses from a gc) at the cost of some safety.
  - kgraves 5y ago
    > Java is faster and safe and can do everything go can do. Including generating static binaries without the use of requiring to download a runtime?
    - weavie 5y ago
      Yup, with everything else being equal, given the choice I will always use the project written in Go.
    - kaba0 5y ago
      Yes, there were AOT compilers availbe for Java since 2000. But more recently, Graal creates very nice binaries.
  - mindwok 5y ago
    The fact that Go has gained so much adoption probably justifies that investment. They are completely different languages and much of it is personal preference.
tonyedgecombe 5y ago
Oracle.
- kaba0 5y ago
  Which increased the pace of development of Java and fully open-sourced it and is overall being a really great steward of the language? That Oracle?
  - cy_hauser 5y ago
    No, the other one. The Oracle we hate and have hated for more than 20 years now.
cy_hauser 5y ago
Because Java has become an unpleasant to code in. Do you really think what you like is what everyone else likes?
- vips7L 5y ago
  Are we looking at the same languages? Java is far more a productive language with generics, lambdas, switch expressions, pattern matching.
  - bob1029 5y ago
    > Java is far more a productive language Since when is productivity a priority for most developers? Seems like 2nd or 3rd fiddle based on HN sentiment these days.
  - cy_hauser 5y ago
    Java (and C# and C++) have become kitchen sink sink languages. Everything is just thrown in. That makes it less productive for me. I've decided I don't want to carry around that much in my head all the time in order to read somebody else's code. I switch languages a lot these days. Go is getting generics in (hopefully) in a few months. Some features are missing but most don't cause much pain and can be either simulated or worked around. Error handling is its biggest failure, but outside of that I find is at least as productive as other compiled languages in the same space.
    - vips7L 5y ago
      > Java (and C# and C++) have become kitchen sink sink languages. Everything is just thrown in. This is far from the truth when it comes to Java. Java doesn't add features willy nilly. They are thought out, and in general implemented better than in other languages. Java's WHOLE philosophy is to move slow and let other languages experiment with features so the kitchen sink doesn't get thrown in because Java has _actual_ backwards compatibility promises and has to support those features for eternity.
- manishsharan 5y ago
Redoubts 5y ago
Deployment story is a tentpole feature, of which these two have very different ideas.
dunefox 5y ago
I don't know, why did we need Java when CL/Smalltalk/etc. already existed?
closeparen 5y ago
Try writing e.g. a TLS proxy in Java and then in Go, and get back to us. For byte arrays, sockets, encodings, cryptography, etc. the stdlib in unparalleled.
- kaba0 5y ago
  Not arguing that Go is a great fit to these niches, but imo java has a really great standard library, including these areas.
zerr 5y ago
Go will loose significant market share as soon as Java and .NET have a mature and usable AOT compiler.
- henry700 5y ago
  Soon. Still, .NET Core is already faster even without AOT on most cases: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/fastest/go-csharpcore.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
- erik_seaberg 5y ago
  I’m worried it won’t. There are an awful lot of people enthusing about how novice-friendly it is, who don’t seem to worry about wasting experts’ time rereading noisy boilerplate (which an expert should have abstracted out and generated instead).

Because they're two different languages, tackling different problems, with entirely different sets of benefits and costs associated with their use.

google234123 5y ago
That’s not enough to justify the (10s, 100?) millions of dollars of investment. Java is faster and safe and can do everything go can do. C++ can be even faster (at least there are no pauses from a gc) at the cost of some safety.
- kgraves 5y ago
  > Java is faster and safe and can do everything go can do. Including generating static binaries without the use of requiring to download a runtime?
  - weavie 5y ago
    Yup, with everything else being equal, given the choice I will always use the project written in Go.
  - kaba0 5y ago
    Yes, there were AOT compilers availbe for Java since 2000. But more recently, Graal creates very nice binaries.
- mindwok 5y ago
  The fact that Go has gained so much adoption probably justifies that investment. They are completely different languages and much of it is personal preference.

tonyedgecombe 5y ago

Oracle.

kaba0 5y ago
Which increased the pace of development of Java and fully open-sourced it and is overall being a really great steward of the language? That Oracle?
- cy_hauser 5y ago
  No, the other one. The Oracle we hate and have hated for more than 20 years now.

cy_hauser 5y ago

Because Java has become an unpleasant to code in. Do you really think what you like is what everyone else likes?

vips7L 5y ago
Are we looking at the same languages? Java is far more a productive language with generics, lambdas, switch expressions, pattern matching.
- bob1029 5y ago
  > Java is far more a productive language Since when is productivity a priority for most developers? Seems like 2nd or 3rd fiddle based on HN sentiment these days.
- cy_hauser 5y ago
  Java (and C# and C++) have become kitchen sink sink languages. Everything is just thrown in. That makes it less productive for me. I've decided I don't want to carry around that much in my head all the time in order to read somebody else's code. I switch languages a lot these days. Go is getting generics in (hopefully) in a few months. Some features are missing but most don't cause much pain and can be either simulated or worked around. Error handling is its biggest failure, but outside of that I find is at least as productive as other compiled languages in the same space.
  - vips7L 5y ago
    > Java (and C# and C++) have become kitchen sink sink languages. Everything is just thrown in. This is far from the truth when it comes to Java. Java doesn't add features willy nilly. They are thought out, and in general implemented better than in other languages. Java's WHOLE philosophy is to move slow and let other languages experiment with features so the kitchen sink doesn't get thrown in because Java has _actual_ backwards compatibility promises and has to support those features for eternity.
manishsharan 5y ago

Redoubts 5y ago

Deployment story is a tentpole feature, of which these two have very different ideas.

dunefox 5y ago

I don't know, why did we need Java when CL/Smalltalk/etc. already existed?

closeparen 5y ago

Try writing e.g. a TLS proxy in Java and then in Go, and get back to us. For byte arrays, sockets, encodings, cryptography, etc. the stdlib in unparalleled.

kaba0 5y ago
Not arguing that Go is a great fit to these niches, but imo java has a really great standard library, including these areas.

zerr 5y ago

Go will loose significant market share as soon as Java and .NET have a mature and usable AOT compiler.

henry700 5y ago
Soon. Still, .NET Core is already faster even without AOT on most cases: https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/fastest/go-csharpcore.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
erik_seaberg 5y ago
I’m worried it won’t. There are an awful lot of people enthusing about how novice-friendly it is, who don’t seem to worry about wasting experts’ time rereading noisy boilerplate (which an expert should have abstracted out and generated instead).