[bayindirh]

We always make this discussion with friends. I don't think every language should tick the boxes the same way.

I also personally like Go a lot. It's filling the gap between C++ and Python for me. If I need something compiled with proper threading support, but C++ would be an overkill, I reach for Go.

Go is designed with a human centric view, IMHO: "Make writing great programs easier rather than design a language with novel/cutting edge features, but with a high cognitive load", and I find it as a noble aim as Rust's guarantees and aspirations.

I understand why people love Rust, but I don't think it's the only one, or the proverbial silver bullet that we finally achieved. Yes, it's nice. Yes, it brings many things to the table, but it's not the final solution for once and for all.

You like Rust? Great, Go for it (unintended pun alert), but I think we need all languages from all paradigms and perspectives.

I find this talk [0] very informative and useful while interacting with other languages and communities. I'm not sharing this with any insinuations towards you, but just find it generally perspective broadening.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX3iRjKj7C0 - What Killed Smalltalk could Kill Ruby.

[xpressvideoz]

> Go is designed with a human centric view, IMHO

If it were Go's design philosophy, it would have allowed unused variables/imports. Those restrictions are there exactly because they help computers, reducing compilation time. The over-focus of compilation time also stems from monorepos being used by Google, whose purpose is also helping computers.

[randomdata]

Fast compilation times are a human-centric goal. The machine couldn't care less if it takes a millennia to compile your program. Only humans care about fast compile times.

But, I'm not sure that is even the primary benefit. The primary benefit is that you won't be incentivized to leave unused imports and variables to litter your code, as I see happen all the time in languages that aren't so strict. The Go team has even stated that they decided there would be no warnings because they've learned that warnings get ignored.

[peterashford]

they could have had a flag for people who prefer those issues to be warnings. for me, they slow my debugging down a great deal

[bayindirh]

Then most (if not all) Go programs wouldn’t compile without that flag.

If something can be abused, it’s going to be abused.

[bayindirh]

I think it goes both ways. Yes, eliminating unused variables and imports accelerates compilation. Also, compilation speed is a great deal for Go, but keeping the code devoid of unused variables also reduces the cognitive load of humans a lot. Keeping language simple is another feature which helps both ways.

[avgcorrection]

> Go is designed with a human centric view, IMHO: "Make writing great programs easier rather than design a language with novel/cutting edge features, but with a high cognitive load", and I find it as a noble aim as Rust's guarantees and aspirations.

I don’t understand his horrid informal writing style trend. You are clearly not quoting anyone and just providing your own interpretation. So why in the hell are you using quotation marks? In this case you could just ditch the quotation marks altogether since the colon already acts as a separator.

[bayindirh]

Equally, I don’t understand the horrid assumption about everyone being born in an English speaking country and has English as the native language.

So, why in the hell are you just berating me via a comment box?

I made a mistake, alright, and used quotation marks as a tone modifier, because I know no other way to do that.

However in this case you could just pointed me the right direction without berating, since pointing out the mistake already acts as a kind direction arrow.

[avgcorrection]

> Equally, I don’t understand the horrid assumption about everyone being born in an English speaking country and has English as the native language.

Did I even hint that I was assuming anything about native vs. non-native English speaker? Or blaming non-native speakers? No. Play that wounded ESL violin somewhere else.

> I made a mistake, alright, ...

I said that I think that it is bad style. Alright. I didn’t say that it is wrong. (People are doing it a lot these days so apparently it isn’t wrong.)

[bayindirh]

There's no blame, I agree, but expecting everyone to know proper use of quotation marks (incl. uncommon ways) pulls in some assumption about proper grammar, hence some long experience with the language. Quotation marks are simple tools, but they are hard to master, because they have nuanced uses too. Getting these things wrong is easy.

> Play that wounded ESL violin somewhere else.

I'm not playing a wounded violin, or any violin for that matter. I'm a double bassist. Jokes aside, I'm not being apologetic, just explaining my position. On the other hand, if reading a comment squarely in your own tone bothers you, you might want to think on that, at least a little.

Your wording of your comment implies that I'm doing something wrong by using quotation marks, and I take a note for that. Why are you so upset because somebody admits that there's a room for improvement?

The only thing I'm not agreeing on is your way of sending the message to this shore, that's it.

The thing is, neither English punctuation, nor Hacker News has many facilities to convey tone while discussing. I like to do that in my writing style to convey feelings and tone of my comment. Quotation marks seemed like a usable way to do that, and I possibly got used to that from literary works I've read, so I copied the method.

However, if a native (or more knowledgeable) person tells me that I'm wrong, I tend to believe them and try to learn the proper way, that's it.