[Kivutar]

Am I the only one thinking that it looks easier to interpret Ruby in Go with cgo than doing the opposite like they did in this article?

Also the good part of Go are the goroutines, the channels, the types, the safety...

The article was fun but they will find the limit as soon as they will try to support the important parts of Go.

Trying to go further will just demonstrate the opposite of their point.

[riffraff]

I think you took this article too seriously, I am pretty sure this is just a fun experiment displaying what things are possible, not anything that is supposed to be used in production[0].

[0] though there is a rich history of "lol jk" projects ending up in production, I'll admit

[vsnf]

> the types

Surely you jest. Go's type system is the worst thing about it by a country mile.