Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Six years of Go

blog.golang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 327 posts

Re: Six years of Go

#41

Post by woah »

chrshawkes wrote: post #32
hahainternet wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/jamwt/status/629727590782099456 What the heck are you talking about. Who uses Swift on this sort of scale? This is just one of the many MANY large companies using Go to power their core infrastructure.

Go brings some good things to the table, yes. I've seen it's popularity rise in recent years, but it seems to be rising slowly. There are a ton of companies that can be listed for almost every technology. Node is another technology I would put ahead of Go as far as adoption. Maybe Go will get better, to me, it's too different than a lot of what I see day to day with Java, C#, Python, JavaScript and on and on. The par…

Go syntax does indeed have a distinct lack of ribbons, bows, and lace doilies.

Re: Six years of Go

#43

Post by RodericDay »

geodel wrote: post #24
kasey_junk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The prevailing feeling of Go is "getting things done". This is a common refrain amongst go proponents and I find it quite distasteful. It either implies those of us who prefer other languages aren't "getting things done" or those who feel productive in Go aren't smart/hard-working/educated/etc enough to "get things done" in other languages. I don't think either is true. I think a more accurate way to look at Go is…

"Getting things done" is quite accurate considering large number of popular Go projects in short time compared to allegedly better design languages ( Scala, Rust, Haskell, D, OCaml etc..)

That may also have to do with the massive push behind it.

Re: Six years of Go

#44

Post by aryehof »

woah wrote: post #36
kasey_junk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The prevailing feeling of Go is "getting things done". This is a common refrain amongst go proponents and I find it quite distasteful. It either implies those of us who prefer other languages aren't "getting things done" or those who feel productive in Go aren't smart/hard-working/educated/etc enough to "get things done" in other languages. I don't think either is true. I think a more accurate way to look at Go is…

It's true though. Go has a small number of language features, and they are only the simplest ones. It can be learned in a day. Other languages like JS, Ruby, and Python have a big fixation on figuring out the prettiest syntax for stuff (JS promises and chaining etc, "Pythonicness", and Ruby's incessant cuteness). In Go, you can't really make things pretty, so you just bang out code.

>> It can be learned in a day.

The syntax perhaps. In reality there are a large number of concepts and idioms to learn on the never-ending road to really becoming proficient.

Re: Six years of Go

#45

Post by Willyfrog »

geodel wrote: post #24
kasey_junk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The prevailing feeling of Go is "getting things done". This is a common refrain amongst go proponents and I find it quite distasteful. It either implies those of us who prefer other languages aren't "getting things done" or those who feel productive in Go aren't smart/hard-working/educated/etc enough to "get things done" in other languages. I don't think either is true. I think a more accurate way to look at Go is…

"Getting things done" is quite accurate considering large number of popular Go projects in short time compared to allegedly better design languages ( Scala, Rust, Haskell, D, OCaml etc..)

that would mean javascript is better than go for GTD ;)

Re: Six years of Go

#46

Post by junke »

geodel wrote: post #24
kasey_junk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The prevailing feeling of Go is "getting things done". This is a common refrain amongst go proponents and I find it quite distasteful. It either implies those of us who prefer other languages aren't "getting things done" or those who feel productive in Go aren't smart/hard-working/educated/etc enough to "get things done" in other languages. I don't think either is true. I think a more accurate way to look at Go is…

"Getting things done" is quite accurate considering large number of popular Go projects in short time compared to allegedly better design languages ( Scala, Rust, Haskell, D, OCaml etc..)

You are mixing productivity (getting things done), quality (better designed languages) and popularity (large number of projects) in the same sentence, but you generally cannot find causal links among them.

Re: Six years of Go

#47

Post by [deleted] »

chrshawkes wrote: post #20
chrshawkes wrote: post #14

I'd say after 6 years adoption rate has been rather lackluster

I'm assuming you trolls down vote because you know it's true. I've tried to use Go, I think it's syntax and unique style sucks compared to C#, Java, Python or even JavaScript.

[deleted]

Re: Six years of Go

#48

Post by chrshawkes »

hahainternet wrote: post #33
chrshawkes wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go brings some good things to the table, yes. I've seen it's popularity rise in recent years, but it seems to be rising slowly. There are a ton of companies that can be listed for almost every technology. Node is another technology I would put ahead of Go as far as adoption. Maybe Go will get better, to me, it's too different than a lot of what I see day to day with Java, C#, Python, JavaScript and on and on. The par…

> Go brings some good things to the table, yes. I've seen it's popularity rise in recent years, but it seems to be rising slowly. There are a ton of companies that can be listed for almost every technology. Then name any company using Swift to the level Dropbox uses Go, or retract your claim. Go code looks nothing like C other than general brace styling. I can't decide if you're trolling or just genuinely this ignora…

Just stating my opinion, not trying to troll. I said "C like" because it is very much different than any C like language I'm used to. Dropbox was using Python as a main technology stack not that long ago so I'm not all that surprised they are seeing huge gains using Go. If Go gains more traction I'll consider using it, until that time, 6 years have gone by and I personally haven't seen anybody asking for Go in the Washington DC metro area.

Re: Six years of Go

#49

Post by tptacek »

kriro wrote: post #25

Go seems like a fun language that has been sitting on my "look into it list" for a while, can't belive it's already six years old. Since the TensorFlow video post is currently on the frontpage as well...as someone who uses neither C++ nor Go (I can write FizzBuzz level of code in both and read both well enough to get what's going on) I have to wonder how much internal buyin Go really has at Google if the core of such…

Go is a language designed by Google people, but it is very much not the standard Google language. Most things Google does aren't done in Go.

Re: Six years of Go

#50

Post by michaelcampbell »

kasey_junk wrote: post #17
kris-s wrote: post #12

I picked up the new Go book (gopl.io) and have had a lot of fun going through it. The prevailing feeling of Go is "getting things done". I also write a little Go program every day as practice. If you want a sample of some Go. https://github.com/kris-s/daily-go

> The prevailing feeling of Go is "getting things done". This is a common refrain amongst go proponents and I find it quite distasteful. It either implies those of us who prefer other languages aren't "getting things done" or those who feel productive in Go aren't smart/hard-working/educated/etc enough to "get things done" in other languages. I don't think either is true. I think a more accurate way to look at Go is…

I think a difference here is not that people don't get things done with other languages, it's that the language was designed with that as a first class metaphor. (Whether or not that is true I can't say, but that's the feeling the poster gets.)
Post reply on HN