6 ms·

Go puzzles me. It's slower than C/C++/Rust and GCed, so not really suited for performance critical stuff. No OO so not really suited for larger complex applic

Go puzzles me. It's slower than C/C++/Rust and GCed, so not really suited for performance critical stuff. No OO so not really suited for larger complex applications. So for smaller not-performance-critical programs, why not Python, Typescript etc? It seems that its popularity exceeds its scope, or am I missing something?

dontlaugh 3y ago
OOP is generally a bad idea, so lacking it is not a downside. The bigger problem is the weak and inexpressive type system, which is no better for C or Python.
k__ 3y ago
K8s is it's lifeline.
- cultavix 3y ago
  Exactly. This is exactly my thought, my only reason for learning Go Lang at all, was/is because of Kubernetes and much of the tooling around it.
  - jjgreen 3y ago
    Interesting -- thanks for that
ecmascript 3y ago
I don't use Go since it's from Google but I wouldn't say that Go / Java can't be used for performance critical stuff? There are a lot of values that goes into "performance critical stuff". For me, it can mean a chat app / money transfers etc that is performance critical but is is of course not as critical as in flight software or other system control software where GC could mean deaths.
- jjgreen 3y ago
  I meant speed-critical by that, sorry if that was unclear. I see opinions like "1/3 the speed of C" bandied around, not bad but means a big model run takes three days rather than one.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Are weapon targeting systems and battleships speed critical enough? https://www.ptc.com/en/products/developer-tools/perc https://www.ptc.com/en/products/developer-tools/perc
  - dagw 3y ago
    "1/3 the speed of C" Of course C can be is 1/3 of the speed of C, if the C is written by two different people. An average Go programmer might very well produce faster code than an average C programmer, if Go has better tools for doing normal things fast in an easy and obvious way
ignoramous 3y ago
This talk by Rob Pike answers some of your questions: https://go.dev/talks/2012/splash.article https://go.dev/talks/2012/splash.article
amelius 3y ago
The same can be said about Rust: its popularity exceeds its scope, because 99% of applications I see that are written in Rust are better off written in a GCed language.
- brigadier132 3y ago
  Except when you suddenly do need performance and predictable latency but all your software is written in python. Its always funny how these performance requirements just creep up on you like that.
  - ycuser2 3y ago
    C# is GCed but has 'unsafe' blocks.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      Alonside value types, manual memory allocation if needed. Not all GC based languages are made alike.
    - neonsunset 3y ago
      Yup, and (monomorphized) struct generics, first-class SIMD vectors and ability to transparently work with memory ranges because Span<T> can also wrap T* + Length from unmanaged code, which lets you directly plug whatever data you got from C/C++ dependency into most CoreLib APIs. In this regard, Go is far inferior as a systems programming language.
  - amelius 3y ago
    Yeah what we really need is a GCed language that allows you to implement parts in no-GC mode. And ideally where you can iteratively migrate GCed parts to no-GC parts when required. Anyway, Python is not a good comparison, as performance is not one of its main qualities.
- jjgreen 3y ago
  As fast as C but with correctness, Rust kind-of owns that space (not a big fan personally).
dirteater_ 3y ago
No OO?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
madeofpalk 3y ago
And still has null pointer exceptions. I could see a role for it in between like rust and python if it had a sane type system.
- Cwizard 3y ago
  I really like Go but the type system is just a bit too weak in my opinion. It is the biggest issue I have with the language ( and the fact that errors are basically untyped, you can type them but no one does…)
vcryan 3y ago
Not seeing how OO makes a language more suited for complex use cases. If you said OO approaches add complexity to any use case, I would agree to that.
Cwizard 3y ago
It compiles down to a single binary and is relatively easy to write. I think that is the reason it is such a popular language for CLI tools. You will never have an issue with missing dependencies or outdated runtime.
- scumola 3y ago
  Nothing is stopping anyone from compiling C or C++ code into a single static binary too. This argument is bull$%!#.
usrnm 3y ago
Go is basically a very specialized language for writing small network services that are supposed to run on Linux. If this isn't your use case, then don't use go, but if it is, then golang is nice. Mostly the runtime and tools, not the language itself, though
vimsee 3y ago
Why does it need to be the best in one single metric when it can be great in many? It is an order of magnitude faster than Python. So it is well suited for performance in many cases. It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. So it is well suited for smaller programs. I can see Go as a very good middle-ground.
- benterix 3y ago
  > It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. I would say, "it is a lot easier to pick up than C++" as the language specification is much smaller. I wouldn't be so sure about the comparison to C, though.
  - usrbinbash 3y ago
    The fact that Go doesn't have C's macros alone already makes it a lot simpler. And please don't get me started on writing concurrent code in C.
    - EnergyAmy 3y ago
      `//go:generate` is far worse than C's macros
      - saturn_vk 3y ago
        That's just a glorified make rule. There's nothing inherently hidden or complex that it generates, unlike macros
      - majewsky 3y ago
        I have written Go professionally for close to 10 years. The only time I encountered go:generate is in yacc parsers deep within libraries. A regular Go developer might go for years without realizing that it even exists. Compare this to C macros.
- shrimp_emoji 3y ago
  > It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. That's why corporations like Google invent "middle-ground" languages. Go from Google Java from Oracle C# from Microsoft These companies need some performance, but they can't hire enough C/C++/Rust devs (not enough exist). They're flush with JS/Python devs, but those languages are too slow. So they invent these abominable "middle-level" languages, with their insane bloat. For myself, I'm not interested in mediocrity to serve corporate interests, so I don't touch them. :p Extremes only: Python and C; Ruby and Rust; JS and C++.
pjmlp 3y ago
Docker (originally written in Java until Go advocates took over), and k8s are what made it popular. Now it is kind of unavoidable in DevOps space for some cenarios. My only complaint is their approach to language design. Inferno with Limbo, Android, Windows Phone, show that there is GC hate, and shipping products to millions of users.
- elp 3y ago
  If Docker was in Java it would have been still born / Java universe only. I don't get the GC hate. If its done properly (like Go) its invisible for 99% of applications and dramatically simplifies things like business logic that don't need to be that complicated or fast. The real culprit is usually Java's slow startup and memory bloat from the JVM.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Nah, that is what anti-Java folks wish for. Java is so bad that Kubernetes + WASM containers is basically redoing application servers 20 years later.
usrbinbash 3y ago
> so not really suited for performance critical stuff. What "stuff" is that exactly? Because Go is designed primarily for backend services and microservices. Considering how much backend software is powered by Python, Java, or *retching sounds* PHP, I highly doubt that is a major consideration in that area. And even when performance actually does matter to an extend where it becomes a more pressing issue than network latency, Go code performs incredibly well and is more than a match for most requirements. > No OO How do you figure? I can write in a completely object oriented style in Go. Also, OO is not a prerequisite for large complex systems, and quite often strict adherence to it can make code much harder to maintain than it needs to be. Maintaining large complex systems requires, first and foremost, code that is easy to grok and maintain. And regarding that particular area, Go runs circles around any major contemporary language, including Python. > It seems that its popularity exceeds its scope Considering how widespread it is by now, I highly doubt that.
rplnt 3y ago
It's fast enough for most applications. Python and Typescript are unmaintanable. Everything around them breaks as the time goes by. I'd argue Python is not suitable for anything that spans more than one file or one week. I don't have enough experience wtih Typescript to hate it as much, but I know I spend most of my time fighting with the tooling. Again, unless you are writing a fresh application that is fine to throw away after a year, Typescript is not it. Go excels in that it is so simple. As the saying goes, you mostly read code, not write it. Go is very easy to understand and review. Which is what you do mostly when working on complex systems in teams. It's extremely easy (and fast) to build and deploy unlike the languages above. That's why companies use go. Not for personal projects, not for drivers, and also probably not for corporate monoliths that require a suit and a tie to contribute.
- jjgreen 3y ago
  Heh, my brother-in-law is a Java suit-and-tie dev, he was telling me that he'd been working on a project for 18 months, the specifications were almost complete and he'd be starting on the coding soon. Being in the startup space I was slack jawed, it's a half-day planning and then start hacking up the MVP for me. Worth noting that he drives a BMW.
- EnergyAmy 3y ago
  Go is easy to understand like Brainfuck is. One singular piece is easier to read, but you've just spread the complexity around, making it hard to see the bigger picture.
lm28469 3y ago
It's really nice to use though, I never liked python and its environment, coming from C go feels like home to me, it's simple and it just works. I never had headaches to setup and run things like I had with python and js. Performance is good enough for most jobs, we're not all working on the bleeding edge, a lot of jobs are more akin to code monkeying basic CRUD
mauvia 3y ago
IME people recommended it for being more batteries-included in terms of webservice stuff and some multithreading/scaling stuff, as well as having multiplatform support and libraries being compiled into the executable. The language also seems to be built for the kind of people who think C has no downsides and everyone should write everything as explicitly as possible, which are an audience that normally doesn't get aimed at.
bitshiftfaced 3y ago
> No OO Are you referring to Object Oriented programming? And if so, why not?
ryandvm 3y ago
Go is: * Easier/safer than C * Less dangerous than Javascript (statically typed and a good standard library) * Much faster than Python I think it's an excellent middle ground, compromise language. It's the centrist candidate of programming languages. Not the best at anything, but on average better than most.
- scruple 3y ago
  I'd add that it also ships with an incredible toolset alongside the installation, has a fully featured standard library, cross compiling is typically painless, and you get a single binary executable out the other side.
Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y ago
You just cited C, how's not having oop a requirement for big apps? Also, unless inheritance is what you mean by oop, it supports the other usecases of oop
conor- 3y ago
> So for smaller not-performance-critical programs, why not Python, Typescript etc? I can compile my go application down to a single, static binary that can run in a distroless container. The packaging/deployment simplicity of Golang appeals to me much more than Python, TypeScript, etc. Also the developer tooling is first class and sustained backwards compatibility is top-notch. I can pretty much always upgrade the version of Go 1.x I target and have 0 worries in the world. Meanwhile in Python and JS land, the dependency management problems are a nightmare.

dontlaugh 3y ago

OOP is generally a bad idea, so lacking it is not a downside. The bigger problem is the weak and inexpressive type system, which is no better for C or Python.

k__ 3y ago

K8s is it's lifeline.

cultavix 3y ago
Exactly. This is exactly my thought, my only reason for learning Go Lang at all, was/is because of Kubernetes and much of the tooling around it.
- jjgreen 3y ago
  Interesting -- thanks for that

ecmascript 3y ago

I don't use Go since it's from Google but I wouldn't say that Go / Java can't be used for performance critical stuff? There are a lot of values that goes into "performance critical stuff". For me, it can mean a chat app / money transfers etc that is performance critical but is is of course not as critical as in flight software or other system control software where GC could mean deaths.

jjgreen 3y ago
I meant speed-critical by that, sorry if that was unclear. I see opinions like "1/3 the speed of C" bandied around, not bad but means a big model run takes three days rather than one.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Are weapon targeting systems and battleships speed critical enough? https://www.ptc.com/en/products/developer-tools/perc https://www.ptc.com/en/products/developer-tools/perc
- dagw 3y ago
  "1/3 the speed of C" Of course C can be is 1/3 of the speed of C, if the C is written by two different people. An average Go programmer might very well produce faster code than an average C programmer, if Go has better tools for doing normal things fast in an easy and obvious way

ignoramous 3y ago

This talk by Rob Pike answers some of your questions: https://go.dev/talks/2012/splash.article https://go.dev/talks/2012/splash.article

amelius 3y ago

The same can be said about Rust: its popularity exceeds its scope, because 99% of applications I see that are written in Rust are better off written in a GCed language.

brigadier132 3y ago
Except when you suddenly do need performance and predictable latency but all your software is written in python. Its always funny how these performance requirements just creep up on you like that.
- ycuser2 3y ago
  C# is GCed but has 'unsafe' blocks.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Alonside value types, manual memory allocation if needed. Not all GC based languages are made alike.
  - neonsunset 3y ago
    Yup, and (monomorphized) struct generics, first-class SIMD vectors and ability to transparently work with memory ranges because Span<T> can also wrap T* + Length from unmanaged code, which lets you directly plug whatever data you got from C/C++ dependency into most CoreLib APIs. In this regard, Go is far inferior as a systems programming language.
- amelius 3y ago
  Yeah what we really need is a GCed language that allows you to implement parts in no-GC mode. And ideally where you can iteratively migrate GCed parts to no-GC parts when required. Anyway, Python is not a good comparison, as performance is not one of its main qualities.
jjgreen 3y ago
As fast as C but with correctness, Rust kind-of owns that space (not a big fan personally).

dirteater_ 3y ago

No OO?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

madeofpalk 3y ago

And still has null pointer exceptions. I could see a role for it in between like rust and python if it had a sane type system.

Cwizard 3y ago
I really like Go but the type system is just a bit too weak in my opinion. It is the biggest issue I have with the language ( and the fact that errors are basically untyped, you can type them but no one does…)

vcryan 3y ago

Not seeing how OO makes a language more suited for complex use cases. If you said OO approaches add complexity to any use case, I would agree to that.

Cwizard 3y ago

It compiles down to a single binary and is relatively easy to write. I think that is the reason it is such a popular language for CLI tools. You will never have an issue with missing dependencies or outdated runtime.

scumola 3y ago
Nothing is stopping anyone from compiling C or C++ code into a single static binary too. This argument is bull$%!#.

usrnm 3y ago

Go is basically a very specialized language for writing small network services that are supposed to run on Linux. If this isn't your use case, then don't use go, but if it is, then golang is nice. Mostly the runtime and tools, not the language itself, though

vimsee 3y ago

Why does it need to be the best in one single metric when it can be great in many? It is an order of magnitude faster than Python. So it is well suited for performance in many cases. It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. So it is well suited for smaller programs. I can see Go as a very good middle-ground.

benterix 3y ago
> It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. I would say, "it is a lot easier to pick up than C++" as the language specification is much smaller. I wouldn't be so sure about the comparison to C, though.
- usrbinbash 3y ago
  The fact that Go doesn't have C's macros alone already makes it a lot simpler. And please don't get me started on writing concurrent code in C.
  - EnergyAmy 3y ago
    `//go:generate` is far worse than C's macros
    - saturn_vk 3y ago
      That's just a glorified make rule. There's nothing inherently hidden or complex that it generates, unlike macros
    - majewsky 3y ago
      I have written Go professionally for close to 10 years. The only time I encountered go:generate is in yacc parsers deep within libraries. A regular Go developer might go for years without realizing that it even exists. Compare this to C macros.
shrimp_emoji 3y ago
> It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. That's why corporations like Google invent "middle-ground" languages. Go from Google Java from Oracle C# from Microsoft These companies need some performance, but they can't hire enough C/C++/Rust devs (not enough exist). They're flush with JS/Python devs, but those languages are too slow. So they invent these abominable "middle-level" languages, with their insane bloat. For myself, I'm not interested in mediocrity to serve corporate interests, so I don't touch them. :p Extremes only: Python and C; Ruby and Rust; JS and C++.

pjmlp 3y ago

Docker (originally written in Java until Go advocates took over), and k8s are what made it popular. Now it is kind of unavoidable in DevOps space for some cenarios. My only complaint is their approach to language design. Inferno with Limbo, Android, Windows Phone, show that there is GC hate, and shipping products to millions of users.

elp 3y ago
If Docker was in Java it would have been still born / Java universe only. I don't get the GC hate. If its done properly (like Go) its invisible for 99% of applications and dramatically simplifies things like business logic that don't need to be that complicated or fast. The real culprit is usually Java's slow startup and memory bloat from the JVM.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Nah, that is what anti-Java folks wish for. Java is so bad that Kubernetes + WASM containers is basically redoing application servers 20 years later.

usrbinbash 3y ago

> so not really suited for performance critical stuff. What "stuff" is that exactly? Because Go is designed primarily for backend services and microservices. Considering how much backend software is powered by Python, Java, or *retching sounds* PHP, I highly doubt that is a major consideration in that area. And even when performance actually does matter to an extend where it becomes a more pressing issue than network latency, Go code performs incredibly well and is more than a match for most requirements. > No OO How do you figure? I can write in a completely object oriented style in Go. Also, OO is not a prerequisite for large complex systems, and quite often strict adherence to it can make code much harder to maintain than it needs to be. Maintaining large complex systems requires, first and foremost, code that is easy to grok and maintain. And regarding that particular area, Go runs circles around any major contemporary language, including Python. > It seems that its popularity exceeds its scope Considering how widespread it is by now, I highly doubt that.

rplnt 3y ago

It's fast enough for most applications. Python and Typescript are unmaintanable. Everything around them breaks as the time goes by. I'd argue Python is not suitable for anything that spans more than one file or one week. I don't have enough experience wtih Typescript to hate it as much, but I know I spend most of my time fighting with the tooling. Again, unless you are writing a fresh application that is fine to throw away after a year, Typescript is not it. Go excels in that it is so simple. As the saying goes, you mostly read code, not write it. Go is very easy to understand and review. Which is what you do mostly when working on complex systems in teams. It's extremely easy (and fast) to build and deploy unlike the languages above. That's why companies use go. Not for personal projects, not for drivers, and also probably not for corporate monoliths that require a suit and a tie to contribute.

jjgreen 3y ago
Heh, my brother-in-law is a Java suit-and-tie dev, he was telling me that he'd been working on a project for 18 months, the specifications were almost complete and he'd be starting on the coding soon. Being in the startup space I was slack jawed, it's a half-day planning and then start hacking up the MVP for me. Worth noting that he drives a BMW.
EnergyAmy 3y ago
Go is easy to understand like Brainfuck is. One singular piece is easier to read, but you've just spread the complexity around, making it hard to see the bigger picture.

lm28469 3y ago

It's really nice to use though, I never liked python and its environment, coming from C go feels like home to me, it's simple and it just works. I never had headaches to setup and run things like I had with python and js. Performance is good enough for most jobs, we're not all working on the bleeding edge, a lot of jobs are more akin to code monkeying basic CRUD

mauvia 3y ago

IME people recommended it for being more batteries-included in terms of webservice stuff and some multithreading/scaling stuff, as well as having multiplatform support and libraries being compiled into the executable. The language also seems to be built for the kind of people who think C has no downsides and everyone should write everything as explicitly as possible, which are an audience that normally doesn't get aimed at.

bitshiftfaced 3y ago

> No OO Are you referring to Object Oriented programming? And if so, why not?

ryandvm 3y ago

Go is: * Easier/safer than C * Less dangerous than Javascript (statically typed and a good standard library) * Much faster than Python I think it's an excellent middle ground, compromise language. It's the centrist candidate of programming languages. Not the best at anything, but on average better than most.

scruple 3y ago
I'd add that it also ships with an incredible toolset alongside the installation, has a fully featured standard library, cross compiling is typically painless, and you get a single binary executable out the other side.

Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y ago

You just cited C, how's not having oop a requirement for big apps? Also, unless inheritance is what you mean by oop, it supports the other usecases of oop

conor- 3y ago

> So for smaller not-performance-critical programs, why not Python, Typescript etc? I can compile my go application down to a single, static binary that can run in a distroless container. The packaging/deployment simplicity of Golang appeals to me much more than Python, TypeScript, etc. Also the developer tooling is first class and sustained backwards compatibility is top-notch. I can pretty much always upgrade the version of Go 1.x I target and have 0 worries in the world. Meanwhile in Python and JS land, the dependency management problems are a nightmare.