What are your option about golang?

It's cool. Now go and write something actually useful with it.

File: made_for_brainlets.png (26KB, 300x441px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x441px

>>60503313
>What are your option about golang?
My opinion goes around pic related.

>>60503313
Retarded syntax, performs slightly worse than Java on average, despite being compiled to native binary.

Hipster garbage-tier language.

>>60503313
/g/ users have fragile egos and need to use something more complicated to feel competent.

>>60503464
>performs slightly worse than Java on average
What?

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/go.html

>>60503313
Great, now go help program for Pantsu

>>60503534
>benchmarksgame
>even then, golang wins only in the toy benchmarks

>>60503313
/g/ users have to fragile egos to admit they are too brainlet to understand the use of proper metaprogramming features.

>>60503313
C++ replacement made by a tranny who is too retarded for C++.

>>60503630
You don't get to pick and choose benchmarks when you've offered none yourself.

>>60503686
I get to identify most of them as numeric, trivial benchmarks, as always when some /g/ shitter gets uppity about their toy language.

>>60503716
>trivial

"this benchmark made me look stupid and I don't like it. Hm, what should I call this to save face?"

>numeric

I find benchmarks that don't involve numbers to be highly suspect

>>60503716
they're only programming languages anon, no need to get your panties twisted about it, chill out

>>60503762
>I find benchmarks that don't involve numbers to be highly suspect
Because you're a Jerry.
Calculating numbers alone means nothing on modern computers (HPC aside, which is why China can win supercomputer benchmarks with relatively dumb architectures).
What's far more important - because that typically slows down actual software - is how fast stuff can get squeezed from memory to the CPU that makes the last benchmarks interesting.

>>60503801
That's what you think, but the more bad software choices get shilled, the higher the chances I suffer for it by having to use of maintain that garbage.

>>60503870
Ok you're right.
What do you think about C#?

>>60503435
kek

>>60503915
Language wise far from the worst I've seen for what it was made for. But the platform is kind of fragmented.
Also, in the early .Net days the libraries have been implemented in a hasty way, so some minor methods weren't actually implemented, when I decompiled some libraries for debugging.

File: retarded-GOpher.png (25KB, 300x441px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 300x441px

>>60503435
Fixed

>>60504092
topkek, perfect

>>60503313
It's a good tool for systems programming, and probably one of the easiest languages to use/compile and distribute to multiple platforms outside of Guile lisp.

You can build a web server and API in pretty much minutes with Go. You can also script it easily, so if you're programming in something else and want to generate Go code it's dead simple.

As a tool it's great, plus they don't allow complexity to be built into the spec. If you want complexity use Common Lisp macros or dig out your C++ IDE

File: 208ce805f8db8eaf8603a4373d35def361cdb17f525a231eec92c6811a5cf57c.png (47KB, 1045x440px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1045x440px

>>60503313
Go is made for retards, and it has been made clear that it really is for retards.

Anyone who doesn't like Go is a 1-language programmer who doesn't have the intelligence to be a polyglot, therefore they feel threatened by languages that are on par or better than their chosen one, as it could put them out of a job.

Go is a great language if you want a fun job.

Learn Java or C++ if you want to make 35k/year working on someone elses spaghetti code.

Learn Go if you want to write stuff from scratch and use your imagination while making 100k+.


t. Go developer, former Java developer

(one of the ways you know Go is good is because everyone can't stop talking about it, even the people that "hate" it, lol)

>>60505688>>60505688
>Learn Java or C++ if you want to make 35k/year working on someone elses spaghetti code.
>Learn Go if you want to write stuff from scratch and use your imagination while making 100k+.
THIS IS SO SPOT ON

I have no idea why anyone would actually WANT to learn C++ or Java over Go. You have to be a masochist.

>>60505688
>Learn Go if you want to write stuff from scratch and use your imagination while making 100k+.
Literally no libraries when compred to java/c++.

>>60505688
>Learn Java or C++ if you want to make 35k/year working on someone elses spaghetti code.
DELET THIS

God I made such a bad choice. Wish I had just become a web dev. The guy who maintains our companies website gets paid more than the three java devs at our company... combined.

Now that same web dev is going to be making even more working on the backend writing Go and I'm pretty sure I'm going to lose my job to him. Oh well, at least it's easy to find another Java job.

>>60505688
>>60505721
>literally none

Look closely at this statement everyone. This is how the anti-golang shills act. You can tell he's a shill because of the hostility.

The more hostile people are to a popular language, the better that language is.

>>60503313
>What are your option about golang?
Please do the fucking needful and ky streetshitter

>>60505688
>Go is a great language if you want a fun job.
This. My company just started training us for a new project written in Go. It's as powerful as Java but it's so fun to write it's like it's not even really work.

We're already trying to convince our boss to let us rewrite our Java infrastructure in Go, mainly because the JVM overhead is just not worth it.

>>60503313
Not my preferred currently trendy language, I think they could do better. That said, at least it might end up disrupting industry standards and clearing the way for better languages.

Job-tier general-purpose languages:
>C
>C++
>Java
>Javascipt
>Go
>OCaml

Anything not on this list is irrelevant as far as general employment goes (yes, there are a few more niche languages that you can get a job with).

Of these C and Go are really the only ones worth learning. Want speed? Use C, it inter-operates with Go using cgo, which is officially supported by the Go team. Want efficiency? Again, use C, although Go is a good choice too if you're concerned about safety. Just care about safety? Use go.

Because Go has strict adherence to standards and idioms, Go code bases are far more digestible than Java or C++. A Go program written by one developer can easily be deciphered by another Go developer, the same can't be said for Java and C++, because they don't have well defined standards. Each project has its own style guide.

People say Go is made for unintelligent programmers, but Java is made from the ground up to be useful with an IDE, something only retards rely on. It's LITERALLY made for retards to click and press buttons instead of just editing text. Go has great official tooling that integrates with text editors to give them IDE-like features, but without the need for a whole IDE. This makes it extremely hard to write bad Go code. Also, almost all Java programs start out with generated code. Java is for literal retards.

C++ changes so often that any old code bases will be nearly indecipherable to new, modern C++ programmers. This means that a decade old code base that's been maintained by 20 or more people will be a convoluted mess. We've all seen them.

Stick with Go if you don't hate your self.

>>60505973
>People say Go is made for unintelligent programmers, but Java is made from the ground up to be useful with an IDE, something only retards rely on. It's LITERALLY made for retards to click and press buttons instead of just editing text.
DELET THIS

>>60505688
but I make 140k/year writing java

>>60505973
>Anything not on this list is irrelevant as far as general employment goes (yes, there are a few more niche languages that you can get a job with).
C# will give you more job than any of those combined, retard

File: JUST.jpg (57KB, 508x400px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 508x400px

>>60503313
jewgle. not even once.

>>60505794
>as powerful as Java
>no equivalent for generics or streams

>>60503313
The syntax is just strange in my opinion, but that's about it.

If i really needed a high performance "cross-platform" binary I would actually use the only truly cross-platform choice.

Java.

Go is pretty much the python meme taken too far. Also enjoy your interface cancer cuz generics are dah devil and classes are so pase.