4 ms·
My hesitation about using Go would be having to forgo all of the ecosystem built up around a more mature language. I haven't coded much in Ruby (I gravitated t
by Patrick_Devine 13y ago
My hesitation about using Go would be having to forgo all of the ecosystem built up around a more mature language. I haven't coded much in Ruby (I gravitated to Python), however I would assume that Ruby has a much richer set of libraries than what is available for Go. I use interpreted languages because of their inherent ability to be able to rapidly prototype applications. If Go's ecosystem doesn't have libraries for things I need, I'm going to be extremely reluctant to switch, regardless of any performance gains, no matter how large they are.
Of course this will only improve with time if other people switch first and decide to fill in missing libraries. From looking at the Go package list at http://golang.org/pkg/ http://golang.org/pkg/ it looks like they've got a reasonable base, and hopefully it will continue to grow.
- NateDad 13y agoHonestly, this is the problem most people bring up with Go, and I think it's a non-problem. The standard library you link to is only the tip of the iceburg. Github and the other popular DVCS websites contain tons of high quality packages to do pretty much anything you want - ORMs, math and science, encryption and security, emulators, servers, parsers etc. I think most people who say "there aren't enough libraries for it" haven't actually looked. If there's something truly missing, point it out. But I think it'll be hard to do.