[mrkeen]

This is starkly opposed to how Go is marketed, especially here on HN.

Go was designed to maximise the number of 'any developers' that could join a project, i.e. 1x developers.

[misja111]

Isn't this exactly what op was saying?

[mrkeen]

Thank you. I had it backwards.

[makapuf]

I get the assomption that with go you will avoid 0.2 programmers and make everyone a 1x programmer. But for me, a 10x programmer can generate complex, well engineered systems with a reasonable structure, not by writing everything in low level, super hard code ? From the level a 10x programmer might operate I'm not sure the programming language would be that important ? Expressivity is nice and some languages are better than others, but from my experience you can write nice artifacts from plain tools?

[mrkeen]

> a 10x programmer can generate complex, well engineered systems with a reasonable structure, not by writing everything in low level, super hard code ?

Yeah maybe, but I'm certainly not at that level.

If a 10x programmer exposes foo() and bar() methods to me, I'll call foo().bar() and not realise I've made a mistake, or that I've violated some invariant that's only in his head, not in the low-level code itself.