Re:D Language accepted for inclusion in GCC
by krylon on Thursday June 22, 2017 @08:05AM
(#14611618)
I found the Go APIs I have worked with far more simple and idiomatic than any Java libraries I have worked with (which is admittedly not a lot).
It is, to a degree a matter of taste, of course, but Go APIs tend to be rather simple, whereas Java libraries seem to often have FileOpenDialogStyleTemplateProcessorFactoryFactory-type interfaces.
The major problem I have with Go currently is lack of function overloading, which means you either have to convert your data around a lot or have many similar functions for different data types that do the same thing (basically), but have different names.
I think the comparison with Python is quite fitting, because both languages encourage a certain way to think about and implementing things. For Python it's called pythonic, in Go it's called idiomatic.
It is, to a degree a matter of taste, of course, but Go APIs tend to be rather simple, whereas Java libraries seem to often have FileOpenDialogStyleTemplateProcessorFactoryFactory-type interfaces.
The major problem I have with Go currently is lack of function overloading, which means you either have to convert your data around a lot or have many similar functions for different data types that do the same thing (basically), but have different names.
I think the comparison with Python is quite fitting, because both languages encourage a certain way to think about and implementing things. For Python it's called pythonic, in Go it's called idiomatic.