4 ms·
I’ll be honest, having been involved off and on with golang over 10+ years, I constantly feel like I’m being gaslit. It’s fine that golang has made missteps al
by stouset 2y ago
I’ll be honest, having been involved off and on with golang over 10+ years, I constantly feel like I’m being gaslit.
It’s fine that golang has made missteps along the way and course corrects. Or if people realize that some hoped-for development doesn’t come to pass, but the current state of things is acceptable.
But the number of times it feels like we’re just told things were always this way, or this was always the goal, or actually having 2/3s of the language being redundant boilerplate is a good thing (it’s “explicit”), or actually they always intended to have generics because it’s important for library authors, or actually systems programming always meant small network services, or actually abstraction is bad unless it’s coincidentally the exact level of abstraction that golang ended up with, or… on and on and on.
It’s exhausting and it’s not a good look on the community.
- mlvljr 2y ago[dead]
- jub0bs 2y ago> actually they always intended to have generics There was a time when generics were not even on the table. I'm pretty sure I remember an old talk by Rob Pike where he says that much. People can change their mind as they learn more about the problem space; that should be tolerable.