alt Hacker NewsWasn't Go supposed to be "simple"? I remember how Go advocates used to boast about not having generics and now it almost seems like Go is trying to become some sort of C# or Java Frankenstein. I'm not even trying to badmouth Golang - just legitimately confused.
Replies
JodieBenitez • today at 4:15 AM
I'm pretty sure there is a silent majority of Go users who don't want/need/know about generics.
➕ show 1 reply
kermatt • yesterday at 9:12 PM
A problem was so many others were screaming about the lack of generics, as though there were not other language options that provided them.
bikelang • today at 12:10 AM
Go genetics are still incredibly simple compared to languages with a rich type system.
> almost seems like Go is trying to become some sort of C# or Java Frankenstein
The original Go team was trying to avoid this:
"Java, JavaScript (ECMAScript), Typescript, C#, C++, Hack (PHP), and more [...] actively borrow features from one another. They are converging into a single huge language." [0]
That team has since moved on, and now Go has begun to join that convergence.
The problem is that most programmers seem to want to write Java, more-or-less. New, simpler languages come along, but once they get popular, the pressure is on to turn them into Java-likes. It happened to Python and now it’s happening to Go. It takes a strong will for language maintainers to say “no”, and their language will suffer in popularity as a result - see, for example, Ruby.
[0] https://go.dev/talks/2015/simplicity-is-complicated.slide#5