camus2

> It's worse than that, the authentic name-brand listing can still ship scammy clones instead because Amazon aggregates the listing from multiple sellers and pretends they're all the same thing

It's called fraud. Some people here call it "scaling" but it's just good old fraud at scale.

> I think it’s a good thing. Better than sacrificing journalistic integrity for clickbait that helps drive more ads

err ... they are doing both.

> It really is striking to me that it is so popular to dislike Go on HN. A lot of people seem to have to voice their dislike for it instead of just not using the language.

It's normal. After the initial hype 3/4 years ago, developers are taking a harder look at that language and with experience its flaws have become more obvious.

Go type system definitely has problems that aren't addressed by its designers, IMHO limiting its adoption.

> A lot of people seem to have to voice their dislike for it instead of just not using the language.

One can use a language daily while still remaining critical of it. People who don't use Go don't care about Go. Only people using Go will complain about its shortcomings.

A lot of Go issues have actually been addressed in previous languages such as Ada. Ada tasks for instance are close to go-routines and they use the same "select" system to deal with concurrent messages. However, Ada tasks unlike go-routines are "objects" that can be referenced as variable, they also can scheduled by the developer.

There is not a single language out there free of criticism, Go isn't different. So it shouldn't really be striking at all.

> a GC is not an impediment in a systems language,

You'd have to define what you mean by system language at first place before making such a claim.

> Like I said: Go does everything C does, but better.

It doesn't do everything C does, it doesn't allow manual memory management at first place.

So you can't pretend that a garbage collected language does everything a language with manual memory management does.

Manual memory management is a feature, Go does not have such a feature. Deterministic behavior in a program is fundamental when writing hardware drivers or real time programming, Go can't do that.

> It's everything C can do, but much better.

No, go has a garbage collector. It is not a replacement for C. Languages like C++, Rust or Ada are.

> That is because browser environment catches all exceptions and displays them in console. So effectively they become handled exceptions.

No, it has nothing to do with the developer console. It has everything to do with the fact that async exceptions do not bubble up in the main execution thread. Promises work the exact same way since they existed as libraries long before they were included in the language. It's about consistency, nothing more, nothing less.

Promises existed way before they were put in the specification and way before async/await. So no, promises could not have been advertised as part of async/await since they came before async/await.

> This code will just ignore the error. While it is expected that the runtime error would float up and terminate the program - that is what runtime errors are made for.

No, this behavior is consistent with how asynchronous programming works in JS.

    myDiv.addEventListener("click",function(event){
       throw "error";
    });

Nobody would expect that code to terminate a browser tab on error.

> This also makes writing tests more difficult because tests often use exceptions to indicate failure.

Then use async functions, problem solved.