3 ms·

Why the Go Language Won't Be Successful

4 points by wkoszek 11y ago

rhodysurf 11y ago
I mean yeah it may not be as conveinent as pip or npm, but neither of those allows you create and distribute a statically linked binary either. Go probably wasn't for you, but in many places npm or pip will not be installed and its a lot easier to give someone a single binary than tell them they have to install python or node.
- wkoszek 11y ago
  You're right. I like the fact that it compiles to a single binary, but getting it to work is a PITA.
alsdjflkasjfd 11y ago
SOO you're just incompetent.
merb 11y ago
really curious, somebody who writes CSH Scripts can't install go. That makes no fucking sense. I thought people working on Unix/Linux reading manuals.. And aren't just robots. Currently the article is definitely plain stupid.
dekhn 11y ago
Go is already successful- based on its current market share and growth rate, it will easily be one of the top ten languages for the next 10 years. So that part of your conclusion is wrong, factually.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  Did you just say the extrapolation of current trends into the future establish a fact about what the future will be that enables you to reject a prediction as "wrong, factually"?
  - dekhn 11y ago
    No. I said it is already successful. Then I said, based on trends, it's likely to become one of the most successful.
- wkoszek 11y ago
  http://langpop.com/ http://langpop.com/
  - mathgeek 11y ago
    Last data update: Fri Oct 25 17:17:19 -0400 2013 I feel like two-year-old data on a relatively young language isn't very relevant.
mathgeek 11y ago
> As a FreeBSD person... Much as I like FreeBSD, ease of use on it is rarely a predictor for whether a language is successful or not (so long as it can be made to run on it).
- wkoszek 11y ago
  Do you think that Python/Ruby would be as popular as they are right now if they were hard to even start to run?
  - mathgeek 11y ago
    That's a rhetorical question, and not something that I'd say is relevant. My point was and remains that if compiling from source on FreeBSD is doable but takes some effort, it's not a brick wall for language adoption.
    - merb 11y ago
      Also compiling C could be quite hard If you don't use tools like make, autoconf, etc.. I mean statically link to all places could be quite hard..
tobz 11y ago
The only thing that seems like it's missing here, in the instructions for the project, are that it should be pulled down with go get instead of git clone, which would have resolved the dependencies for you. Obviously, correct me if I'm wrong, but... that doesn't ever actually change for any other language. You still do a pip install or an npm install and then another command to run and/or compile your code. So, really, it's a documentation failure, and on the part of the project authors, at that. You never used Go prior, so you didn't know to use go get. You used Python, Node.js, etc for a first time, too, at some point, and the only reasonable conclusion is that you also didn't know to use <insert language-package-manager-relevant command here> that first time, either. Unless, of course, the project you were using it for documented that. Or you went off and searched for it yourself.

4 points by wkoszek 11y ago

I mean yeah it may not be as conveinent as pip or npm, but neither of those allows you create and distribute a statically linked binary either. Go probably wasn't for you, but in many places npm or pip will not be installed and its a lot easier to give someone a single binary than tell them they have to install python or node.

wkoszek 11y ago
You're right. I like the fact that it compiles to a single binary, but getting it to work is a PITA.

alsdjflkasjfd 11y ago

SOO you're just incompetent.

merb 11y ago

really curious, somebody who writes CSH Scripts can't install go. That makes no fucking sense. I thought people working on Unix/Linux reading manuals.. And aren't just robots. Currently the article is definitely plain stupid.

dekhn 11y ago

Go is already successful- based on its current market share and growth rate, it will easily be one of the top ten languages for the next 10 years. So that part of your conclusion is wrong, factually.

dragonwriter 11y ago
Did you just say the extrapolation of current trends into the future establish a fact about what the future will be that enables you to reject a prediction as "wrong, factually"?
- dekhn 11y ago
  No. I said it is already successful. Then I said, based on trends, it's likely to become one of the most successful.
wkoszek 11y ago
http://langpop.com/ http://langpop.com/
- mathgeek 11y ago
  Last data update: Fri Oct 25 17:17:19 -0400 2013 I feel like two-year-old data on a relatively young language isn't very relevant.

mathgeek 11y ago

> As a FreeBSD person... Much as I like FreeBSD, ease of use on it is rarely a predictor for whether a language is successful or not (so long as it can be made to run on it).

wkoszek 11y ago
Do you think that Python/Ruby would be as popular as they are right now if they were hard to even start to run?
- mathgeek 11y ago
  That's a rhetorical question, and not something that I'd say is relevant. My point was and remains that if compiling from source on FreeBSD is doable but takes some effort, it's not a brick wall for language adoption.
  - merb 11y ago
    Also compiling C could be quite hard If you don't use tools like make, autoconf, etc.. I mean statically link to all places could be quite hard..

tobz 11y ago

The only thing that seems like it's missing here, in the instructions for the project, are that it should be pulled down with go get instead of git clone, which would have resolved the dependencies for you. Obviously, correct me if I'm wrong, but... that doesn't ever actually change for any other language. You still do a pip install or an npm install and then another command to run and/or compile your code. So, really, it's a documentation failure, and on the part of the project authors, at that. You never used Go prior, so you didn't know to use go get. You used Python, Node.js, etc for a first time, too, at some point, and the only reasonable conclusion is that you also didn't know to use <insert language-package-manager-relevant command here> that first time, either. Unless, of course, the project you were using it for documented that. Or you went off and searched for it yourself.