|
|
|
|
|
by PopsiclePete
3433 days ago
|
|
Go is a language that is a bit tedious to write, no doubt about that, but it's very easy to read. I spend a lot of my time reading other people's code and I really appreciate that. The fact that Scala as a language allows something like SBT to not only be created, but accepted, means I don't want anything to do with it. I've suffered long from the Ruby ecosystem's mentality of "look at what I can do!" of self-serving pointless DSL's and frameworks and solemnly swore to myself to stay away from cute languages that encourage bored devs to get "creative". It's about trade-offs, I guess. Go definitely appeals to a lot of people, and not all of us are unaware of the amazing "progress" that has been made in the 80's and 90's. Awesome progress that brought us Java, SOAP, C++, Javascript-on-the-server, and a slew of other tech some of us want to stay far, far away from. |
|
Figuring out 1000 lines of code that could have been 10 and verbosity caused by a lack of generics is not going to help you understand code quicker. Figuring out what 10 lines of Scala do may take more time compared to 10 lines of go, but that's not a measure of velocity, the information density of go is just too low. At least 10 lines of scala fit on my screen, 1000 lines of go don't.
Code style issues imho are a team issue, if you do reviews these issues can be managed.
> not all of us are unaware of the amazing "progress"
Look at Rust, at least they did their homework. With Rust out there I can't see any reason to use Go except maybe their crappy GC.