3 ms·
Agreed. However, IMO Go's designers have good taste. That's hard to quantify but you know it when you see it and I see it in Go. Not so much in most other langu
by hondo77 3y ago
Agreed. However, IMO Go's designers have good taste. That's hard to quantify but you know it when you see it and I see it in Go. Not so much in most other languages. Again, IMO.
- kaba0 3y agoArguably, Go is the only language I couldn’t even infer the syntax for before learning it. I can quite easily follow any ML, or C-like language, even if this is the first time I see it, and then go just writes some bullshit list of tokens, where you can’t even decipher which is a type or an identifier name. And then does some receiver syntax in function definitions that is absolutely unhinged.
- harkinian 3y agoI really dislike Golang, everything about it, even the name, and this is one reason. C C++ Rust can do systems stuff, Java JS Python and even C# can do applications. All with pretty intuitive syntax except for Rust kinda, but Rust has good reasons for that. I don't get why Golang, ObjC, or Swift exist other than some company pushing them, and their guiding design principles are "be different to be different."