Hacker News Reader

Comment by exdsq | Hacker News Reader

Aaaand now watch every projects abstraction increase tenfold under the weight of generics

Or put another way, 1/10th the surface area of code to write, maintain, review, and bug check. And much less interface{} abuse.

That's taking "tenfold" at face value. I don't see that happening personally. The go community has enough of a nucleus of devs with a certain mindset that I don't see crazy Haskell levels of abstraction taking over. What I do see is more type safety coming to interface dynamicism.

Or an expectation of competence from developers and expecting them to consider tradeoffs of their design- in other words doing their damn jobs as opposed to the language baby sitting them away from tools they might use incorrectly.

There’s nothing wrong with a language being strict with what you can do to force good programming styles. An expectation of competence is nice if you can afford it, but it’s also nice to have languages that mean you don’t have to take that risk. It’s why I liked Go and why I disliked working in Haskell. Look at Lisp - large teams get tied in knots because of the freedom. Go was nice because it just stopped you doing ‘smart’ things. Now it has generics you may as well use Rust or something else.

having used rust that isn't a sane trade off. rust is a wonderful language but its orders of magnitude slower than go for development.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com