On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 00:08:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 22:30:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Go has stability, is production ready and has an ecosystem
with commercial value.
You could say the same things about Cobol or PHP, but that
doesn't mean the languages themselves should be free from
There is a difference between claiming that language A makes this
and that difficult and claiming that language B is better than A.
To claim the latter you need to look at comparable larger real
world programs and how it fares regarding scaling and
My opinion of Go was very much consistent with the article. It
doesn't mean much to me to have a stable language that I don't
want to use. His points are valid.
I could easily make similar points about D and it's somewhat
messed up type system, syntax and libraries. It would be quite
easy to convincingly claim that C++/Go/Python are a better
languages than D.
The Go designers keep the language small and polish it to
production quality before moving on with new features. Some of
the Go designers also have acknowledged that exceptions and
generics can be useful, but that they don't want to add features
until they know it is the right thing to do and how to go about
If you aren't making a research language (and D most certainly
would fail in that arena) the only thing that matters is how it
fares in a production setting by programmers who do full time
programming in the language.