I am not a fan of Go, and I also wish these things were true (and more[1], actually), but I find it hard to agree that its priorities are "terribly misplaced." Inside the context of Go's goals (e.g., "compile fast") and non-goals (e.g., "make it easy to attach debuggers to apps replicated a zillion times in Borg") these trade-offs make a lot of sense to me. Like: Go rewrote their linker, I think, 3 times, to increase the speed. If step 1 was to wade through the LLVM backend, I am not sure this would have happened. Am I missing something?
I love Rust, but Go is focused on a handful of very specific use cases. Rust is not. I don't know that I can fault Go for choosing implementation details that directly enable those use cases.
I love Rust, but Go is focused on a handful of very specific use cases. Rust is not. I don't know that I can fault Go for choosing implementation details that directly enable those use cases.
[1]: http://dtrace.org/blogs/wesolows/2014/12/29/golang-is-trash/