131–140 of 250 posts
I think it misses * Made by really famous veteran language designers * Backed by Google Not saying it doesn't deserve its popularity, but most of the things listed are not necessary for explaining its popularity, and none of them (even taken together) are sufficient.
Easy, - Backed by Google - Plan 9 and UNIX people as designers - Docker migrated from Python to Go - Kubernetes migrated from Java to Go - After Docker and Kubernetes explosion, all Cloud Native Foundation projects start using the same language, thus adoption
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, When Docker migrated away from LXC the new code was in Go, https://www.infoq.com/news/2014/03/docker_0_9/ Kubernetes moved when some Go advocates joined the team and pushed for a rewrite, https://archive.fosdem.org/2019/schedule/event/kubernetesclu...
> Kubernetes moved when some Go advocates joined the team and pushed for a rewrite Frankly, that hardly says anything about the technical merits of that switch. In fact, it reads like a poorly-though tautology.
Even to this day JVM memory consumption is way way higher than Go and it would make no sense to use it in Kubernetes.
It's resources than workload could not use meaning higher overhead for Kubernetes which would reduce adoption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my case "backed by Google" was a deterrent, not a feature. I gave the language a chance after trying Rust (backed by Mozilla - which was a feature to me ;-) and I found it easy to start. Go is very well documented: That was the killer feature for me. No more search tutorials / videos etc. - just get the go book, read it, and start coding. Of course there are tutorials and videos everywhere for fun stuff. But good…
To me, in the old Go vs Rust debate, there are two things that are abundantly clear in making a compelling case for Go. First, I don't think even the most devoted rustacean can deny that Rust has a hell of a learning curve. But perhaps most importantly is that Go has a strong and extensive standard library that covers many 21st century applications (e.g. talking to REST APIs). The problem to me with the Rust "no stdl…
And those two options don't strike me as equally unattractive. Writing everything that isn't in the standard library from scratch is completely impractical for modern apps. Nobody does that in Rust. Integrating crates from the ecosystem into your workflow is just part of developing in the language.
What I'm more interested in is the comparison between the cases of Go and Dart, which both are languages developed by Google. Why Go is so much more successful (in the system programming domain) than Dart (in the web/mobile/desktop domains)? Many of the listed good choices (e.g. being developer-focused) can be (had been?) applied to Dart as well.
Dart tried to build a better mousetrap. While you might say it succeeded, it wasn't enough to get people away from their older and less fancy, but working, mousetraps.
The CTO dictated our move to Go two years ago on what felt like a combination of whimsy and anti-Microsoft sentiment. I'll admit that there are parts of the language that are nice, such as the relatively snappy compile times and single statically linked binary output, but not a single day goes by where I don't miss C#, and more specifically .NET Core (now just .NET I guess?), which can do everything Go is doing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my case "backed by Google" was a deterrent, not a feature. I gave the language a chance after trying Rust (backed by Mozilla - which was a feature to me ;-) and I found it easy to start. Go is very well documented: That was the killer feature for me. No more search tutorials / videos etc. - just get the go book, read it, and start coding. Of course there are tutorials and videos everywhere for fun stuff. But good…
I agree here. Using the two examples go and rust, Go's documentation is on another level compared to rust, it's more common to see examples in Godoc's than in Rust documentation... That's not a failure of Rust or the maintainers, it's just a different culture I guess. If I want to do something in Go with a new lib, i can easily put together what I need to do using the documentation. Where as with Rust, it's often con…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then why is Dart much less successful?
Because it's selling point is Flutter? Where you're forced to use Dart?
I think it misses * Made by really famous veteran language designers * Backed by Google Not saying it doesn't deserve its popularity, but most of the things listed are not necessary for explaining its popularity, and none of them (even taken together) are sufficient.
We can sort of evaluate of much "backed by Google" means by looking at other languages backed by Google. The main one I have in mind is Dart. Here's a few links: - https://madnight.github.io/githut/#/pull_requests/2021/4 - https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/ - https://redmonk.com/sogrady/2022/03/28/language-rankings-1-2... Dart seems to be doing relatively well. Considering Go has more things in its favor than Dart, i…
Similar to the peer comment to me, Dart languished for a long time. You have to remember Dart was created as a replacement for Javascript and that they wanted other browsers to embed the DartVM in their browsers. This got absolutely rejected by Mozilla, Apple, and Microsoft.
They then attempted to use it as a transpiled language, but it always generated larger javascript files than most other solutions. It still exists and is used, but Typescript ended up being a better solution. (note: there is AngularDart, which is a bit of a fork/mirror of Angular, but for Dart). This has some uses within Google as I understand it, but it's usage outside of that is rather small.
Flutter using Dart ended up being a large boon for the language and drives much of the changes to the DartVM.
Dart had to go through various targeted usages before it really found a home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that Golang is older than Rust. When it came out it made a splash, despite not having any books or videos yet, despite not having any libraries available yet. It didn't die in obscurity (like someone else's "Go" language that existed before!) precisely because it had names of Rob Pike & Google associated with it.
Yes! The "killed by Google" meme is young. Back in the days it was like "i want to be like Google" (ignoring the fact that most people don't have scale like Google and very different problems) and anything out of Google must be good!
It's not a service they can pull the plug on, it's a software package that would still exist even if the entire Google organization went poof tomorrow. Because if it was a service they could just pull the plug on I would never have started using it.