Hacker News Reader

Comment by vec | Hacker News Reader

I'm starting to use Go as an arguably better Node. Very fast, easy (pseudo)concurrency, relatively nice HTTP capabilities in the stdlib. It wouldn't be my first choice for building a full library, but it works well as an internal component in a service oriented architecture or a background worker for a queuing system.

View on HN

Go is very uncontroversially a better Node. It also predates Node.

Depends on what you mean by "better".

Better language? Not really, if you want types TypeScript is a much better option. With node+typescript+react you can get end-to-end typechecked code with no FFI involved - thats really, really cool.

Better concurrency? Oh yeah, definitely. Better core libraries? Yes, by far.

Better package ecosystem and management? Definitely not.

    > Better language? Not really,

There is no conceivable universe in which the expression "JavaScript is a better language than Go" evaluates to true.

...except for in JavaScript itself:

    ~$ node
    > "JavaScript is a better language than Go" ? true : false
    true
    > "JavaScript" > "Go"
    true

Unless/until Go gets generics, I stand by my statement. A horrible type system that severely limits expressiveness is worse than no type system. Even TypeScript's type system is miles ahead compared to the one in Go.

I doubt it. The node ecosystem is second to none.

All the things node is designed to do and it does it at least as fast as Go.

We can argue that the Go concurrency model is better.I think nodejs's is good enough,easier to understand and to deploy. If your goal is to write lightweight webservers that do a specific task,nothing beats node in my opinion.

> easier to ... deploy

Ehm, really? Tree of javascript, possibly with some compiled libraries easier to deploy than a static binary?

I'm not saying node is hard to deploy, but I think maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean here?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com