Why Go Is Not Good

Re:Why Go Is Not Good by gclaramunt on Monday June 30, 2014 @11:28AM (#7965529)

> Always remarkable that such critiques always focus on the utterly trivial, while absolutely ignoring things like concurrency or composing complex systems.

But generics are a fundamental tool to solve concurrency or composition. How do you propose to compose complex systems when you can't abstract on the type? How can you add new concurrency constructs that work safely for every type without generics?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Go Is Not Good by rogpeppe1 on Tuesday July 01, 2014 @09:55AM (#7970623)

Actually Go interfaces map pretty well to a concurrent (and likely networked environment). It's often straightforward to put a network-based implementation behind a Go interface type. When was the last time you saw a web service that is parameterised by a type?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Go Is Not Good by gclaramunt on Thursday July 03, 2014 @10:45AM (#7983330)

I guess we have a different approach about what to expect in a programming language.

Maybe if Go was dynamic or with full type inference, will like it more :)

I bet is great for the niche between C++ and Java, but not sure if I would want to use as a general programming language

[ Parent | on HN ]