zlacker

Ahhhh, he's a D programmer. That explains most of it. D programmers are only slightly behind C++ programmers in their universal hatred for Go. Rubyists can learn to love Go, Pythonistas can learn to love Go, NodeJs people even, but D programmers, man, it's like just the mere existence of Go is an assault on their very souls.

If D and C++ programmers hate Go, it's doing something right.

>>Popsic+(OP)
Awful ad-hominem.

Who cares if all D programmers hate Go? Maybe for good reason. Or maybe they're just being erratic. Who knows? Not the readers of this comment, because it doesn't contain any constructive argument.

>>Popsic+(OP)
I hate to have to refer to something so stereotypically "Hacker News" (as it was witten by Paul Graham), but this seems like a great example of the Blub Paradox playing out: C++ and D offer some really key features that all those other languages don't, so the reason you are more willing to tolerate Go is because you don't find yourself thinking "how could someone seriously have designed a language without these key features". Now, you might try to argue that it is somehow C++/D that are missing out, but FWIW: I have been programming in Python for seven years, and have probably at this point written as much if not more Python than I ever did C++, and the only reason I do it is because there are some "trivial" (and yet key) tooling and library advantages... the language itself honestly just feels "dumb".

>>Popsic+(OP)
Go was built for C++ programmers, so your point is not valid.

>>Popsic+(OP)
No, it just means there is nothing in Go that would cause a D or C++ programmer to switch to it. The feature set of D and C++ is a superset of Go feature set.

This "they laughed at Einstein, so I must be right too" mentality is pure fanboyism.

>>Grue3+yD
As a (mostly ex) C++ oriented engineer, there is a hell of a lot that would make me prefer Go to C++ for a lot of tasks. A language is not about its features, it's about how it facilitates what you need to get done.