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. bccdee+NW[view] [source] 2025-08-22 15:58:20
>>Skepti+OS
Yeah the big problem is that most languages have their fair share of rough edges. Go is performant and portable* with a good runtime and a good ecosystem. But it also has nil pointers, zero values, no destructors, and no macros. (And before anyone says macros are bad, codegen is worse, and Go has to use a lot of codegen to get around the lack of macros).

There are languages with fewer warts, but they're usually more complicated (e.g. Rust), because most of Go's problems are caused by its creators' fixation with simplicity at all costs.

◧◩◪
3. kragen+4J1[view] [source] 2025-08-22 20:00:28
>>bccdee+NW
I thought it was obvious that codegen was better than macros—at least, textual macros. You can't tell me Ken Thompson omitted macros from the Golang design because he didn't have experience using languages with macro systems!

Even AST-based macro systems have tricky problems like nontermination and variable capture. It can be tough to debug why your compiler is stuck in an infinite macro expansion loop. Macro systems that solve these problems, like the R⁵RS syntax-rules system, have other drawbacks like very complex implementations and limited expressive power.

And often there's no easy way to look at the code after it's been through the macro processor, which makes bugs in the generated code introduced by buggy macros hard to track down.

By contrast, if your code generator hangs in an infinite loop, you can debug it the same way you normally debug your programs; it doesn't suffer from tricky bugs due to variable capture; and it's easy to look at its output.

[go to top]