←back to thread

Go is still not good

(blog.habets.se)
644 points ustad | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
blixt ◴[] No.44983245[source]
I've been using Go more or less in every full-time job I've had since pre-1.0. It's simple for people on the team to pick up the basics, it generally chugs along (I'm rarely worried about updating to latest version of Go), it has most useful things built in, it compiles fast. Concurrency is tricky but if you spend some time with it, it's nice to express data flow in Go. The type system is most of the time very convenient, if sometimes a bit verbose. Just all-around a trusty tool in the belt.

But I can't help but agree with a lot of points in this article. Go was designed by some old-school folks that maybe stuck a bit too hard to their principles, losing sight of the practical conveniences. That said, it's a _feeling_ I have, and maybe Go would be much worse if it had solved all these quirks. To be fair, I see more leniency in fixing quirks in the last few years, like at some point I didn't think we'd ever see generics, or custom iterators, etc.

The points about RAM and portability seem mostly like personal grievances though. If it was better, that would be nice, of course. But the GC in Go is very unlikely to cause issues in most programs even at very large scale, and it's not that hard to debug. And Go runs on most platforms anyone could ever wish to ship their software on.

But yeah the whole error / nil situation still bothers me. I find myself wishing for Result[Ok, Err] and Optional[T] quite often.

replies(18): >>44983384 #>>44983427 #>>44983465 #>>44983479 #>>44983531 #>>44983616 #>>44983802 #>>44983872 #>>44984433 #>>44985251 #>>44985721 #>>44985839 #>>44986166 #>>44987302 #>>44987396 #>>45002271 #>>45002492 #>>45018751 #
traceroute66 ◴[] No.44983465[source]
> Just all-around a trusty tool in the belt

I agree.

The Go std-lib is fantastic.

Also no dependency-hell with Go, unlike with Python. Just ship an oven-ready binary.

And what's the alternative ?

Java ? Licensing sagas requiring the use of divergent forks. Plus Go is easier to work with, perhaps especially for server-side deployments.

Zig ? Rust ? Complex learning curve. And having to choose e.g. Rust crates re-introduces dependency hell and the potential for supply-chain attacks.

replies(8): >>44983495 #>>44983537 #>>44983543 #>>44983603 #>>44983770 #>>44985640 #>>44985845 #>>44988378 #
morsecodist ◴[] No.44985845[source]
This just makes it even more frustrating to me. Everything good about go is more about the tooling and ecosystem but the language itself is not very good. I wish this effort had been put into a better language.
replies(2): >>44986403 #>>44989047 #
iTokio ◴[] No.44986403[source]
Go has transparent async io and a very nice M:N threading model that makes writing http servers using epoll very simple and efficient.

The ergonomics for this use case are better than in any language I ever used.

replies(1): >>44987040 #
1. layer8 ◴[] No.44987040{3}[source]
Implementing HTTP servers isn’t exactly a common use case in software development, though.
replies(1): >>45001615 #
2. iTokio ◴[] No.45001615[source]
Sorry I didn’t mean implementing a raw http server like nginx, but just writing a backend.