Re:Why Go? Use Racket
by eloff on Thursday March 12, 2015 @02:44PM
(#9192869)
There are many valid criticisms of go, but the one presented in this article make no sense. Or maybe only make sense if you're a huge dynamic languages fan and can't stomach static typing. Personally, as someone who used to be a huge fan of dynamic languages like Python, I've sobered up as I've grown older and had to fight with large python and JavaScript code bases. A compiler that is fast with clear error messages is tremendously valuable.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
If using dynamic typing like Python's is being drunk, then at least Go is like being tipsy - not quite sober, but quite functioning.
Only if you make a habit of using reflection (you shouldn't). Otherwise it's designated driver all the way.
Re:Why Go? Use Racket
by thomasahle on Thursday March 12, 2015 @05:07PM
(#9193929)
> Only if you make a habit of using reflection
Or type switches. Or nearly anything involving interface{}.
Tipsy is probably the most dangerous mode. People feel like they can probably still drive when they're just tipsy.
No. Drunk driving is much worse. (Yes, people do that -- I mean they actually understand that they are "drunk" and not just "tipsy"... and unfortunately still drive :/.)
Ah, yeah, I wouldn't want to claim that tipsy driving is worse than flat out drunk driving. I only wanted to suggest that there's higher net risk when it's less dangerous but is perceived to be not dangerous at all.