Top right is Christopher Hitchens.

Well written article. Also points are valid. What I disagree with is that author overestimates dangers that those ugly aspects pose. There are linters and unit tests to catch those things before they reach production. I can’t quickly recall when the lats time failure to initialize a structure field was a source of bug that was pushed to master (in fact, I love to use zero values as intended). Most bugs I remember are the logical ones, which no compiller can prevent. But then, I am senior developer, so maybe I can’t understand the struggles of juniors.

It may well be that Go is not adequate for production services unless your shop is literally made up of Go experts (Tailscale) or you have infinite money to spend on engineering costs (Google).

Reality says otherwise. I worked for a few large companies that chose Go as their main code base language. I can also see wide adoption of Go as backend language. Those things mentioned in article not only did not increase development or maintenance costs of those products, but reduced them. From the perspective of developer, who used C++ before Go.

I use Ctrl+Shift+Arrow Up/Down for multiple cursors. Maybe because I’m already long time Linux user and use MMB to paste selected text.

I’ve dumped 18 years of C++ experience for Go in 2018, and never wanted to come back. Took me a couple of months to become accustomed.

The main Go’s feature is a green light for ignoring OOP baggage collected for decades, which makes writing code unnecessary burden. And Go have tools for not doing that.

Yes, sometimes it can be a bit ugly, but if you’re ready to trade academic impeccability for ease of use, it’s a real blast.

I’ve seen a lot of bad code in Go, which tried to do OOP things taught in school or books. Just don’t. Go requires a different approach, different mindset. Then everything falls in their places.

In other words, Anon is right on every point? Honestly, I thought some were exhaggerations. But thanks for confirming each and every.

Which suspiciously reminds optimization. Like computer game with infinite procedural world, where map chunks only generated where player interacts with world, being just formula (algorithm) everywhere else.

I was referring another comment in the thread, sorry for confusion. The OP attacks both Go and microservices, although it’s no Gos fault in the story.

Also I just hate Java too, and OOP in general.

According to votes, hating Java is bad, but hating microservices is good.

Well, that’s the architecture problem, not the language.

Swap Java and Go in text, then I buy it. Java is memory hungry monstrosity that runs on JVM and idiomatically uses piles of abstractions. I have exactly opposite experience, when rewriting a microservice from Jave to go reduced memory usage tenfold and sped up requests processing.