zlacker

[return to "Go is still not good"]
1. Skepti+OS[view] [source] 2025-08-22 15:37:32
>>ustad+(OP)
Go has its fair share of flaws but I still think it hits a sweet spot that no other server side language provides.

It’s faster than Node or Python, with a better type system than either. It’s got a much easier learning curve than Rust. It has a good stdlib and tooling. Simple syntax with usually only one way to do things. Error handling has its problems but I still prefer it over Node, where a catch clause might receive just about anything as an “error”.

Am I missing a language that does this too or more? I’m not a Go fanatic at all, mostly written Node for backends in my career, but I’ve been exploring Go lately.

◧◩
2. ecshaf+LU[view] [source] 2025-08-22 15:46:28
>>Skepti+OS
> It’s faster than Node or Python, with a better type system than either. It’s got a much easier learning curve than Rust. It has a good stdlib and tooling. Simple syntax with usually only one way to do things. Error handling has its problems but I still prefer it over Node, where a catch clause might receive just about anything as an “error”.

I feel like I could write this same paragraph about Java or C#.

◧◩◪
3. Skepti+9Z[view] [source] 2025-08-22 16:08:25
>>ecshaf+LU
I mostly agree with you except the simple syntax with one way of doing things. If my memory serves me, Java supports at least 2 different paradigms for concurrency, for example, maybe more. I don’t know about C#. Correct me if wrong.
◧◩◪◨
4. mattma+E31[view] [source] 2025-08-22 16:33:33
>>Skepti+9Z
But that's only because they're older and were around before modern concurrent programming was invented.

In C#, for example, there are multiple ways, but you should generally be using the modern approach of async/Task, which is trivial to learn and used exclusively in examples for years.

[go to top]