4 ms·
This is exactly it. There are a lot of people who have argued passionately about this (the same crew of commentators appear with the same complaints in every si
by personZ 12y ago
This is exactly it. There are a lot of people who have argued passionately about this (the same crew of commentators appear with the same complaints in every single Go discussion), and now they are so deep in their advocacy that they feel their pride depends upon aggressively and vigorously defending it. It has gotten worse every time this has come up, and most of the comments are the logical conclusion. I mean seriously one of the comments calls it "ghettolang" without parody. Is this really Hacker News?
And exactly as you said -- for those people so offended by this: Move on. Use something different. Go isn't for you. As someone who has integrated Go very effectively into my life, I'm rather glad the Go team isn't listening to every railing fanatic and their pet issues.
- coldtea 12y ago>one of the comments calls it "ghettolang" without parody. Is this really Hacker News? And then: >I'm rather glad the Go team isn't listening to every railing fanatic and their pet issues. Oh, the irony. Why people assume that only people NOT using Go are complaining, it's beyond me. Or why people assume that if you like features X of a product, and would like it to have feature Y, you shouldn't.
- personZ 12y agoNothing ironic about it. There are very vocal, very passionate people who pile the hate on Go in every single discussion regarding it. The list can usually be summarized as "ways that Go is not Haskell". Which is strange, because a post about Haskell tends to be about Haskell. A post about Go tends to be a lot of people telling everyone how Go is unlike, to its detriment, other languages. Great -- go use those languages. Why people assume that only people NOT using Go are complaining HN doesn't have a large community of commentators, and you get to know the common personalities. There are absolutely people building solutions in Go who might think "it would be nice to have generics", and indeed that's exactly why they've never been discounted or denied by the Go team, simply deferred. But these discussions are dominated not by those people, but instead people telling you why Go is not Rust is not Haskell is not C# is not... What's the point? We have a lot of languages and environments to choose from, and we do. Why are people seemingly threatened by Go? It's bizarre. Generics are nice and they're important, but there are a lot of nice and important attributes to a language, and they have bigger priorities. If generics were critical to my work, I simply wouldn't use Go (and indeed, for some subsections and components, I don't for that reason. Life goes on. Different tools serve different needs).
- tome 12y ago> Why are people seemingly threatened by Go? I don't think anyone's threatened by Go. I think some people are disappointed that Go's designers chose not to add a lot of extra type-related features, including generics, for some extra effort on the part of the language designers but very little cost (and much benefit) to the language users. If this was an unused toy language there would be no problem, but the existence of lots of code written in any language will have a small cost on other developers for social reasons, even if they don't use that language.
- personZ 12y agoI don't think anyone's threatened by Go. Yet your final sentence says exactly the opposite, indirectly. As if Go is some sort of scourge that these gallant guardians of language must fight. Further, if you assess the simplicity of adding generics, and it is at odds with the actual people creating the language and tools (among whom are some of the most respected names in this industry), that's a point when you should stop and reassess your own, outsider-looking-in perspective.
- Dewie 12y ago> , and it is at odds with the actual people creating the language and tools (among whom are some of the most respected names in this industry) I hope to one day experience a Go thread with no appeals to authority with regards to the language inventors/implementers.