| Wait... I have seen average programmers who can write less dumbed down code than the most succinct code possible in Go. I have seen below average programmers who understand how to use generic data structures / programs in C++ / Java / C# etc.. > It's designed to be simple, to be boilerplate, to be easily reviewable/checkable by coding teams. Boilerplate and easily reviewable are at the odds. Unless Enterprise style java is the bar, it is hard for anyone to say that. Go is too much boilerplate than average programmer's python code, for example. Don't tell me python is dynamic. The average programmer doesn't do metaclass magic. Being so much boilerplate and verbose `if err != nil` and no generics and no methods/functions for common operations like finding the index of an element in an array. All this leads to for-loop-inside-while-loop-inside-for-loop attrocities where it is harder to decipher what the intention is. Compare to python where you have methods on collections to carry out common manipulations, and list comprehension in python is so cleaner than 4 line imperative go code. Go seems to miss why python/JS/ruby are so popular. It is because so much is built in that you can communicate __intent__ clearly without getting bogged down in details. Compared to any modern language that's not C and not mediaeval C++, Go is so much more verbose. Even java has enough shortcuts to do these common things. And don't start telling me this leads to incomprehensible code. Coding standards are there. What's unreadable is 8 level indented imperative attrocity of blue collar language Go. > Not sure why Go and Rust are always the compared languages. They both emerged at same time and have some overlapping scope - eg static native compilation, memory safety etc.. but there similarities end. However, there is lack of a a popular, succinct natively compiled language which gets out of the way to write software. Everyone knows expressive languages need not be slow or difficult to deploy. Some people have to write Go in dayjob and the sibling rust, having quality-of-life improvements that anyone expects in a post-2000 language [0], seems to be a closer candidate to comparison (even though rust isn't the optimal language for the things Go is used for, given it is a systems language with static memory management) Others like D and Nim have a fraction of users. Of course there are also some vocal rust fanboys who think crab god is not popular because world is anti intellectual. |
> Go seems to miss why python/JS/ruby are so popular.
Not sure what is there to miss especially since Go is pretty popular for its age. Considering it is not even mandated or officially supported like Swift by Apple, or Dart/Kotlin by Google/Android.