Just because you're intelligent doesn't mean you should spend all that intelligence trying to figure out other people's messes. Simplicity and explicitness are paramount when collaborating.
Just because you're intelligent doesn't mean you should spend all that intelligence trying to figure out other people's messes. Simplicity and explicitness are paramount when collaborating.
> Simplicity and explicitness are paramount when collaborating.
So is succinctness (most people can't speed read code). The examples he gives make Go look anything but succinct.
At a certain point succinctness does more harm than good. Go captures nearly all of the sense of python's early values (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020/), without requiring all that much more in the way of boilerplate. So you have to if-check an error value here and there, no big deal. You should be handling errors anyway.
If Haskell's succinctness level is 1, then I would rate python's at 2, go's at 4, and java's at 20.
Please point me to the large codebase your ported from Java to Go -- if you don't have actual data, just two people making up idiotic numbers let me get involved.
Go is 185175% better than Java and 8165% better than Haskell -- or making up numbers just makes us all look like goddamn idiots.