4 ms·
> The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, mayb
by pjmlp 6mo ago
> The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, maybe learned C or C++, probably learned Python. They’re not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to build good software. So, the language that we give them has to be easy for them to understand and easy to adopt.
-- Rob Pike
- elch 6mo agoAny reference to the biggest issues with Go in your opinion, and what are you comparing it to?
- pjmlp 6mo agoBasically complete disregard for the history of programming languages and learnt lessons. Go fits well close to Oberon released in 1987, or Limbo in 1995, when exceptions and generics were still esoteric features. Instead they had to reach out to Phil Wadler to help them, as he did previously with Java almost a decade earlier, panic/recover is clunky way to do exceptions, instead of doing enumerations like Pascal in 1976, it needs a a iota/const code pattern, hardcoded urls for source repos, if err all over the place like last century programming, many errors are plain strings, ah and nil interfaces what a great gotcha.
- elch 6mo agoThanks!
- jaapz 6mo agoExactly my point