I hate to be "that guy", but you should try Rust. It also has amazing tooling, and is probably more comparable to C/C++, considering you don't have to use a garbage collector in Rust.
why though? some perf gains?
Go 1.17 Release Notes
31–40 of 222 posts
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#32A couple of nice tweaks that I'm happy to see.
I didn't completely expect it, but I now find myself reaching for Go first when writing something like a small script or utility that I'd previously have written in something like Ruby or Python. It all feels much more solid.
That said… I really chafe against the anaemic type system when writing anything a larger than that. I hate not being able to communicate things like "this can never be nil and if it's is then it's an error" to the compiler. I resent having to write three lines of boilerplate every time I want to reverse a flipping 10-item slice, and the design decisions leading to the existence of `time.IsZero()` are bordering on criminal.
I don't know if I'm the odd one out for feeling like that – parts of the language and ecosystem are just absolutely wonderful to work with, but the unergonomic sharp edges bother me so much that I end up finding it really _annoying_ to write a lot of it.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#33Never tried to write Go before, maybe it’s time that I stop by.
It's meh for a language, it's simple which is what they are trying to achieve but it all comes with trade offs like all programming languages. I would say a large portion of a language is how you mesh with the syntax and tooling around it.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#34Anyone seen jobs for business applications? Go seems to have a sweet spot for systems. I'd like to replace Java at my work but no one else is doing it.
I use (and enjoy using) both Go and Java at work, and Go is in my opinion very much a Java replacement more than it is, say, a Python or C++ replacement. It is absolutely suitable for business logic, and I've never been quite sure what its designers mean when they say it's a systems language. Yes, you can squeeze great performance out of it, but you can with Java as well.
The way I see it, both Go and Java are crawling towards the same ideal: a compiled, statically typed, garbage collected, modern enough program language targeted for a majority of back-end concerns. Go has to close the gap mostly just with generics; and Java with memory layout (Valhalla), concurrency (Loom), and ergonomics (Amber); but they will both be there in 3-5 years.
Take this with a grain of salt if you like, but while I probably find it more fun to program in Go, I don't think there's a compelling reason to switch a large codebase from Java to Go. It often feels like my company is needlessly divided by programming languages even though they solve fairly similar problems. It's one thing to move off of a dying language, but Java is certainly not that.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#35The go code I wrote in 2015 looks and works exactly the same way new Go code I'm writing today. Even with all the upgrades.
You have no idea how amazing that feels.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#36I hate to be "that guy", but you should try Rust. It also has amazing tooling, and is probably more comparable to C/C++, considering you don't have to use a garbage collector in Rust.
why though? some perf gains?
Go isn't low level in the same way that Rust is. Both languages have their places, but Go seems to be more of a better Python/JS, whereas Rust is a better C++.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#37At first I didn't like Go because I thought it was too opinionated. But the more I used it, the more I found the tooling to be just heads and shoulders above similar languages like C/C++. I use VSCode a lot, and in VSCode you can press "F12" to jump to the location of a function definition. In Go I find myself deep diving into github libraries all the time just because F12 takes me there. That never happened with C/C…
Have you tried "F2" (rename symbol)? It's amazing, it's like a "safe" find & replace all.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#38At first I didn't like Go because I thought it was too opinionated. But the more I used it, the more I found the tooling to be just heads and shoulders above similar languages like C/C++. I use VSCode a lot, and in VSCode you can press "F12" to jump to the location of a function definition. In Go I find myself deep diving into github libraries all the time just because F12 takes me there. That never happened with C/C…
If your reference point is C/C++ then sure.. Go is a progress, but give more modern languages a try, like Kotlin, they sure are a major ergonomic and featureful evolution over go
That's the sad truth. Go is not leap and bound better on that front, it is C/C++ that has not catched up.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
why though? some perf gains?
Go isn't low level in the same way that Rust is. Both languages have their places, but Go seems to be more of a better Python/JS, whereas Rust is a better C++.
Python/Js are interpreted by default and not good system programming choices. Go is compiled. This comparison totally misses the mark. In fact Go was developed mostly as C++ but sometimes Python replacement at Google.
Re: Go 1.17 Release Notes
#40The go code I wrote in 2015 looks and works exactly the same way new Go code I'm writing today. Even with all the upgrades. You have no idea how amazing that feels.
[deleted]