Go: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Re:Go: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by jmhain on Friday April 13, 2018 @02:23PM (#16832581)

> Go has more of a focus on simplicity.

But specifically on simplicity of implementation. Which often means pushing the complexity onto the developer.

This line from the article is a pretty good summary of Go in general:

> It looks to me a like a big flaw in the language design to make its implementation easier.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Go: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by frankietwenty9 on Friday April 13, 2018 @03:05PM (#16833004)

> But specifically on simplicity of implementation

I'd suggest a simple language requires a simpler implementation.

> It wasn't enough to just add features to existing programming languages, because sometimes you can get more in the long run by taking things away. They wanted to start from scratch and rethink everything. ... [But they did not want] to deviate too much from what developers already knew because they wanted to avoid alienating Go's target audience.[1]

Sometimes for simple problems a simple tool is the best fit.

[1]https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2009/11/go-ne... (via wiki)

[ Parent | on HN ]