3 ms·

The Brexit comparison doesn't hold water — Brexit is widely viewed as a failure, yet Go continues to gain popularity year after year. If Go were truly as bad as

The Brexit comparison doesn't hold water — Brexit is widely viewed as a failure, yet Go continues to gain popularity year after year. If Go were truly as bad as described, developers wouldn't consistently return to it for new projects, but clearly, they do. Its simplicity isn't a rejection of expertise; it's a practical choice that's proven itself effective in real-world scenarios.

tl 2y ago
This is optics versus reality. Its goal was to address shortcomings in C++ and Java. It has replaced neither at Google and its own creators were surprised it competed with python, mostly on the value of having an easier build and deploy process.
- 0x696C6961 2y ago
  Go has replaced Java and C++ in numerous other environments.
  - cyberpunk 2y ago
    We use a boatload of off the shelf go components; but i don't see it making any progress at replacing java at my bank. We are extremely happy with where java is these days...
    - pdimitar 2y ago
      Really bad example if you ask me. Banks are literally the last institutions that will make a change.
- dilyevsky 2y ago
  > It has replaced neither Except that it did. Just because people aren’t rewriting borg and spanner in go doesn’t mean it isnt default choice for many of infra projects. And python got completely superseded by go even during my tenure
  - Joker_vD 2y ago
    And haven't people actually rewritten Kubernetes in Go? I vaguely recall it was originally written in Java.
- lelanthran 2y ago
  If we're using "did not meet the stated goal" as a bar for success, then Java also "failed", because it was developed as an embedded systems language and only pivoted to enterprise applications after being a dismal and abject failure at the stated goal. If Java is not a failure then neither is Go. If Go is a failure then so is Java. Personally I think it is inaccurate to judge a mainstream, popular and widely adopted language as a failure just because it did not meet the goal set at the initiation of the project, prior to even the first line of code getting written.
thomashabets2 2y ago
I would say this is another thing that would take quite a while to flesh out. Not only is it hard to have this conversation in text-only on hackernews, but HN will also rate limit replies, so a conversation once started cannot continue here to actually allow the discussion participants to come to an understanding of what the they all mean. Discussion will just stop once HN tells a poster "you're posting too often". Hopefully saving this comment will work. Go, unlike Brexit, has pivoted to become the solution to something other than its stated target. So sure, Go is not a failure. It was intended to be a systems language to replace C++, but has instead pivoted to be a "cloud language", or a replacement for Python. I would say that it's been a failure as a systems language. Especially if one tries to create something portable. I do think that its simplicity is the rejection of the idea that there are experts out there, and/or their relevance. It's not decisions based on knowledge and rejection, but of ignorance and "scoping out" of hard problems. Another long article could be written about the clearly not thought through use of nil pointers, especially typed vs untyped nil pointers (if that's even the term) once nil pointers (poorly) interact with interfaces. But no, I'm not comparing the outcome of Go with Brexit. Go pivoting away from its stated goals are not the same thing as Brexiteers claiming a win from being treated better than the EU in the recent tariffs. But I do stand by my point that the decision process seems similarly expert hostile. Go is clearly a success. It's just such a depressingly sad lost opportunity, too.
- 0x696C6961 2y ago
  > I do think that its simplicity is the rejection of the idea that there are experts out there, and/or their relevance. It's not decisions based on knowledge and rejection, but of ignorance and "scoping out" of hard problems. Ok, I'll ask the obvious question. Who are these experts and what languages have they designed? > Another long article could be written about the clearly not thought through use of nil pointers, especially typed vs untyped nil pointers (if that's even the term) once nil pointers (poorly) interact with interfaces. You're getting worked up about something that's hardly ever an issue in practice. I suspect that most of your criticisms are similar.
  - kbolino 2y ago

tl 2y ago

This is optics versus reality. Its goal was to address shortcomings in C++ and Java. It has replaced neither at Google and its own creators were surprised it competed with python, mostly on the value of having an easier build and deploy process.

0x696C6961 2y ago
Go has replaced Java and C++ in numerous other environments.
- cyberpunk 2y ago
  We use a boatload of off the shelf go components; but i don't see it making any progress at replacing java at my bank. We are extremely happy with where java is these days...
  - pdimitar 2y ago
    Really bad example if you ask me. Banks are literally the last institutions that will make a change.
dilyevsky 2y ago
> It has replaced neither Except that it did. Just because people aren’t rewriting borg and spanner in go doesn’t mean it isnt default choice for many of infra projects. And python got completely superseded by go even during my tenure
- Joker_vD 2y ago
  And haven't people actually rewritten Kubernetes in Go? I vaguely recall it was originally written in Java.
lelanthran 2y ago
If we're using "did not meet the stated goal" as a bar for success, then Java also "failed", because it was developed as an embedded systems language and only pivoted to enterprise applications after being a dismal and abject failure at the stated goal. If Java is not a failure then neither is Go. If Go is a failure then so is Java. Personally I think it is inaccurate to judge a mainstream, popular and widely adopted language as a failure just because it did not meet the goal set at the initiation of the project, prior to even the first line of code getting written.

thomashabets2 2y ago

I would say this is another thing that would take quite a while to flesh out. Not only is it hard to have this conversation in text-only on hackernews, but HN will also rate limit replies, so a conversation once started cannot continue here to actually allow the discussion participants to come to an understanding of what the they all mean. Discussion will just stop once HN tells a poster "you're posting too often". Hopefully saving this comment will work. Go, unlike Brexit, has pivoted to become the solution to something other than its stated target. So sure, Go is not a failure. It was intended to be a systems language to replace C++, but has instead pivoted to be a "cloud language", or a replacement for Python. I would say that it's been a failure as a systems language. Especially if one tries to create something portable. I do think that its simplicity is the rejection of the idea that there are experts out there, and/or their relevance. It's not decisions based on knowledge and rejection, but of ignorance and "scoping out" of hard problems. Another long article could be written about the clearly not thought through use of nil pointers, especially typed vs untyped nil pointers (if that's even the term) once nil pointers (poorly) interact with interfaces. But no, I'm not comparing the outcome of Go with Brexit. Go pivoting away from its stated goals are not the same thing as Brexiteers claiming a win from being treated better than the EU in the recent tariffs. But I do stand by my point that the decision process seems similarly expert hostile. Go is clearly a success. It's just such a depressingly sad lost opportunity, too.

0x696C6961 2y ago
> I do think that its simplicity is the rejection of the idea that there are experts out there, and/or their relevance. It's not decisions based on knowledge and rejection, but of ignorance and "scoping out" of hard problems. Ok, I'll ask the obvious question. Who are these experts and what languages have they designed? > Another long article could be written about the clearly not thought through use of nil pointers, especially typed vs untyped nil pointers (if that's even the term) once nil pointers (poorly) interact with interfaces. You're getting worked up about something that's hardly ever an issue in practice. I suspect that most of your criticisms are similar.
- kbolino 2y ago