Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
teamten.com
Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
1–10 of 237 posts
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#22016. Generics have been added.
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#3>There’s no ternary (?:) operator. Every C-like language has had this, and I miss it every day that I program in Go. The language is removing functional idioms right when everyone is agreeing that these are useful.
And everyone agreed so hard that it was removed from almost every modern C replacement (Rust, Nim, Zig, Elixir, Kotlin).
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#4> There’s no ternary (?:) operator. Every C-like language has had this, and I miss it every day that I program in Go. The language is removing functional idioms right when everyone is agreeing that these are useful. And everyone agreed so hard that it was removed from almost every modern C replacement (Rust, Nim, Zig, Elixir, Kotlin).
All those languages have if-expressions, which is all ?: is.
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#5They've fixed the import / modules situation to a point where it's usable and much improved, and generics have been added.
However, the issue this brings up about structs / types not explicitly declaring which interfaces they implement is a real and unaddressed problem, especially in large codebases. The only tool that I'm aware of that finds implementations is GoLand, at steep JetBrains prices.
Figuring out what type an API is asking for should not require reading every line of code in the package, and slows down every developer of large Go projects
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#6> There’s no ternary (?:) operator. Every C-like language has had this, and I miss it every day that I program in Go. The language is removing functional idioms right when everyone is agreeing that these are useful. And everyone agreed so hard that it was removed from almost every modern C replacement (Rust, Nim, Zig, Elixir, Kotlin).
Rust has if/else (ternary) and match (N-ary) expressions, so it doesn't need a separate ternary operator. All of the other “C replacements” listed (which are a weird list for that description, especially Elixir, but whatever) have at least if/else-expressions, which, again, are ternaries.
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#7They've fixed the import / modules situation to a point where it's usable and much improved, and generics have been added. However, the issue this brings up about structs / types not explicitly declaring which interfaces they implement is a real and unaddressed problem, especially in large codebases. The only tool that I'm aware of that finds implementations is GoLand, at steep JetBrains prices. Figuring out what typ…
When developers who usually make 6 figures of money complain about $90/yr IDE price I just cannot help laugh. Actually it's even better... the price elevators down from $90 -> year2 90 - 20% -> year3 90 - 40%.
Over three years that's like $150-$200 total and it will save you so many headaches. But that's a steep price? Are you kidding? Why do developers hate tools that cost money when they save them time and allow them to do more?
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#8Title needs 2016
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#9They've fixed the import / modules situation to a point where it's usable and much improved, and generics have been added. However, the issue this brings up about structs / types not explicitly declaring which interfaces they implement is a real and unaddressed problem, especially in large codebases. The only tool that I'm aware of that finds implementations is GoLand, at steep JetBrains prices. Figuring out what typ…
When developers who usually make 6 figures of money complain about $90/yr IDE price I just cannot help laugh. Actually it's even better... the price elevators down from $90 -> year2 90 - 20% -> year3 90 - 40%. Over three years that's like $150-$200 total and it will save you so many headaches. But that's a steep price? Are you kidding? Why do developers hate tools that cost money when they save them time and allow th…
Professional developers in the USA usually make 6 figures.
Re: Why I Don't Like Golang (2016)
#10They've fixed the import / modules situation to a point where it's usable and much improved, and generics have been added. However, the issue this brings up about structs / types not explicitly declaring which interfaces they implement is a real and unaddressed problem, especially in large codebases. The only tool that I'm aware of that finds implementations is GoLand, at steep JetBrains prices. Figuring out what typ…
When developers who usually make 6 figures of money complain about $90/yr IDE price I just cannot help laugh. Actually it's even better... the price elevators down from $90 -> year2 90 - 20% -> year3 90 - 40%. Over three years that's like $150-$200 total and it will save you so many headaches. But that's a steep price? Are you kidding? Why do developers hate tools that cost money when they save them time and allow th…
Putting fundamental features of the language behind a price barrier at all will keep students and people who want to experiment with the language out of the ecosystem. This isn't a papercut, it's an intentional omission that has backfired and can only be fixed by tooling. If the only way to access an often necessary feature is proprietary, why not make the whole language proprietary at that point?