[JodieBenitez]

Pretty much my thoughts the other day... now that Codex does the writing, maybe I can finally switch to Go for the web backend stuff without being annoyed by some of its archaisms and gain significant execution performance, while still having a relatively easy to read language.

[kccqzy]

You ask a machine to write your code and you still care about being easy to read?

In my experience the people who care the most about code readability tend to be the people most opinionated on having the right abstractions, which are historically not available in Go.

[JodieBenitez]

> You ask a machine to write your code and you still care about being easy to read?

I just happen to read what the machine writes, which is a way to both learn and inspect. So yes, I care about the code being relatively (and I stress relatively) easy to read. Go is ok there.

[thunky]

I don't think people mind reading Go as much as they mind writing it.

[kccqzy]

Nah all the `if err != nil` is just so much noise they obscures the real logic. And for the longest time it didn’t have generics to write map/filter/reduce on slices, forcing people to use loops where the intention is less clear.

[maleldil]

Ideally, the errors shouldn't be returned as-is, but wrapped with context instead. If that context doesn't matter for you, you can have your editor wrap the if instead, which helps a lot.

[brianwawok]

I have shifted as much as I can python to go when I don’t code. It’s just faster and the compiler catches more errors, win win,

[JodieBenitez]

Just tried this yesterday... great experience indeed. Go has archaisms and can be verbose but it's still very much readable and codex catches errors easily.