Except that the go developers explicitly stated their design goal was to replace C++ for their needs, not C. And that completely failed, and now the focus is on pulling in python devs.
I jumped into Go bandwagon early on, even tried to do some initial contributions. Mostly because Go has an Oberon feel to it. A GC enabled systems programming language I used for a while in the mid-90's.
However, I quickly became disappointed with Go's spartan design, given my broad experience across languages and paradigms.
That is why somehow I feel it is more indicated for C developers, that could live with a GC enabled language.
As they would mostly getting type safety and a few more features, whereas developers from other languages are mostly giving away features.
Yes, but from what I've learn of the original developers, "replace C++ for their needs" means, "we are using C++ currently, we don't want to, so we're making a language which incorporates a core which helps our tasks (goroutines). To do this we will fix up some issues we have with C."
However, I quickly became disappointed with Go's spartan design, given my broad experience across languages and paradigms.
That is why somehow I feel it is more indicated for C developers, that could live with a GC enabled language.
As they would mostly getting type safety and a few more features, whereas developers from other languages are mostly giving away features.