(not googler)
Google's codebase is idiomatic to Google due to their strict language tooling. e.g. their C++ code stays away from advanced features. The tooling teams at Google have very strong say.
Google's codebase is idiomatic to Google due to their strict language tooling. e.g. their C++ code stays away from advanced features. The tooling teams at Google have very strong say.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was version 2.7 too...
Tldr: there’s multiple factors to consider here and it’s more interesting to understand the pressures that cause the decisions, especially if you want to try to create a world where different decisions are made.
Outside specific cases around machine learning, it’s really not: Go is that language. It’s not like each of those platforms doesn’t have to have a similar team that understand Go anyway (for their SDK), so they could save their customers the abject pain of Python dependency management by just writing their CLIs using it.
For anything more advanced they offer language specific SDKs in Rust, Swift, Kolton, etc…
For example integrating storage in an iOS app.
EXTREME predictability (e.g. as never ever using the system's libssl), in trade for huge binaries. They go pretty damn far in this: you won't catch a Google binary even using most of libc.
Which honestly is a GOOD thing because it would make it much easier for newcomers to ramp up on existing codebases. Most people aren't used to working with spaceships and constexprs.
Readability is also far more valuable to a large team than efficiency for anything that isn't a number-crunching loop.