[cardanome]

It has support for typing Arrays and Dictionaries these days. Yes, nested Arrays are still a problem but I am sure they will get to it.

As for performance well the GDExtension support has also gotten much better. You can always go down to C++, Rust, Nim, Zig or whatever. It is really easy to set up.

[TulliusCicero]

But then I have to code in those other languages, languages that require manual memory management that I'm not as familiar with. C# is many times faster than gdscript, and I don't have to think about memory hardly at all. And it's easy enough to code the whole game in it.

[cardanome]

You can use C#. It is well supported except for the (currently) missing web target and Microsoft is funding C# support so it will not get abandoned.

You can also use other garbage collected languages. I once tried the Lua bindings and they worked fine.

The problem with C# is that its garbadge collection is not really suited for game dev. The creator of the Mono runtime actually calls using C# his Multi-million dollar mistake and instead works on swift bindings for Godot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzt36EGKEZo

But if you really love C# nothing is stopping you. I prefer GDScript.

[TulliusCicero]

I know, I already use C# for Godot. My original comment was just to explain why I don't use gdscript.

Swift might be cool too, I've only used it a bit but I liked what I saw.

[mh2266]

rust and swift don't require manual memory management. rust is RAII and swift is either value types or reference-counted.

(yeah there are escape hatches, but it's weird to use them)

[eudamoniac]

This line of reasoning is silly, because no one in their right mind would choose to use gdscript for any program that was not in Godot. You can't even type a nested array, among many other issues. That is because gdscript is a bad language objectively. It being part of Godot doesn't change that. Why would I choose to write my game, the thing that is very hard and will take years, in an objectively bad language? I would not choose that, because that doesn't make any sense to do. Writing code is like 90% of the work if I hire artists. I am not going to do 90% of years of work in a shitty language, because I don't have to do that, being a skilled developer in real languages.

So when people come out and defend gdscript for being not that bad, it's like, okay, but it's still really shitty compared to any normal language like C# or even Python. It is made by a game engine, used by thousands of people, instead of being made by gorillions of dollars poured into it by tech companies and used by millions of people. I'm just going to use good languages instead.

[cardanome]

The Godot devs tried bindings to other languages first and it sucked: https://docs.godotengine.org/en/stable/about/faq.html#what-w...

GDScript might be a bad general purpose language but it is a good language for Godot.

You say Python is a "normal" language for me while I love Python, modern Python has gotten way too complicated and clunky with lots of new features added. For me GDScript feels much closer to the original pythonic ideal. Plus it is much easier to learn for people that are not professional programmers.

Maybe you don't enjoy using GDScript and that is fine but saying it is a "objectively bad" language is really uncalled for. For many devs it is the right fit.

[danbolt]

If you’re being objective about a programming language, its strengths and weaknesses are always going to a reflection of the game you’re trying to make. Python’s ecosystem will get you very far making web services, but less so with cert on consoles.

C# and GDScript are no different. They both have made design decisions for particular reasons.

You’re a skilled developer in real languages, so I’d encourage you to explore why other developers might prefer a DSL for their needs!