FAQ
Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
language Golang?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Search Discussions

  • David Anderson at Mar 29, 2014 at 7:59 am
    Jazz and chocolate.

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Игорь Авдошкин wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
    email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Игорь Авдошкин at Mar 29, 2014 at 8:09 am
    With humor)

    суббота, 29 марта 2014 г., 15:59:07 UTC+8 пользователь David Anderson
    написал:
    Jazz and chocolate.


    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Игорь Авдошкин <avdo...@gmail.com<javascript:>
    wrote:
    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
    email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Jan Mercl at Mar 29, 2014 at 8:49 am

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Игорь Авдошкин wrote:
    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    Its QM probabilistic name.

    -j

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Gerard at Mar 29, 2014 at 9:03 am
    We can joke around this, but you should probably read the FAQ<http://golang.org/doc/faq>
    .
    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 8:43:29 AM UTC+1, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Igor Avdoshkin at Mar 29, 2014 at 9:10 am
    I do not joke! I am interested!

    суббота, 29 марта 2014 г., 17:03:42 UTC+8 пользователь Gerard написал:
    We can joke around this, but you should probably read the FAQ<http://golang.org/doc/faq>
    .
    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 8:43:29 AM UTC+1, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Gerard at Mar 29, 2014 at 9:23 am
    I was referring to the previous answers, not to your question.
    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 10:10:46 AM UTC+1, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    I do not joke! I am interested!

    суббота, 29 марта 2014 г., 17:03:42 UTC+8 пользователь Gerard написал:
    We can joke around this, but you should probably read the FAQ<http://golang.org/doc/faq>
    .
    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 8:43:29 AM UTC+1, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Gyepi SAM at Mar 29, 2014 at 9:10 am

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43:29AM -0700, Игорь Авдошкин wrote:
    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    This is a difficult question to answer. Strength and weakness are not
    intrinsic properties of a language. For some formulation of a problem,
    a language X might be a better fit than language Y.

    Experts formulate the problem so as to make the best use of the language.

    What's your real question?

    -Gyepi

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Igor Avdoshkin at Mar 29, 2014 at 9:16 am
    General question, represent the common language probelemy. Specific
    questions asked.

    суббота, 29 марта 2014 г., 17:10:22 UTC+8 пользователь Gyepi SAM написал:
    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43:29AM -0700, Игорь Авдошкин wrote:
    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    This is a difficult question to answer. Strength and weakness are not
    intrinsic properties of a language. For some formulation of a problem,
    a language X might be a better fit than language Y.

    Experts formulate the problem so as to make the best use of the language.

    What's your real question?

    -Gyepi
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Gyepi SAM at Mar 29, 2014 at 9:22 am

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 02:16:39AM -0700, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:
    General question, represent the common language probelemy. Specific
    questions asked.
    I don't understand this. Please rephrase.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Jonathan T Barnard at Mar 29, 2014 at 1:18 pm
    According to the Internet, not being Haskell is apparently a pretty big
    weakness of the Go language. It also has really awful JVM interop.
    On Saturday, 29 March 2014 18:43:29 UTC+11, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Hotei at Mar 29, 2014 at 1:29 pm
    It really does depend on what you want to do with the language. As an
    example, being over 2 meters tall is usually a strength if you are a
    basketball players - but if you had to work in a mini-submarine it might be
    a weakness. Same with any language. Some are better at solving certain
    types of problems than others. Go is oriented to several specific problem
    domains and does very well with them. This forum has a lot of good examples
    where it works well. The group tends not to dwell on those domains where
    go isn't the right choice, though there are some active threads that insist
    on re-plowing that ground.

    If you have a problem domain in mind I'm pretty sure someone here has good
    information about how go would perform in that arena.

    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Romain Griffiths at Mar 29, 2014 at 2:34 pm
    The biggest weakness is its coolitude. It is top cool to be used.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Ukiah Danger Smith at Mar 29, 2014 at 2:43 pm
    I was hoping for more of a healthy discourse, but this thread is terrible.

    Anyone who knows a technology well enough knows it's not perfect and has
    points they want improved even if they love the whole. What are these pain
    points for you.

    And please don't mention generics or package management.




    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Michael Jones at Mar 29, 2014 at 4:02 pm
    Being relatively new, you could say that:

    1. The supporting tools/code are less mature than those of older languages.
    (More Java, JS, C, C++, FORTRAN code, compilers, IDEs, etc. in existence.)

    2. The standard compiler suite does not optimize to the level that GCC
    optimizes C & C++. (Though there is GCCGO, and that is arguably standard as
    well)

    3. The Go runtime is a controlling factor in Go performance. It is good but
    continues to evolve. If you look at the evolution of Java and Javascript
    performance over a decade, then you might expect to see gains in Go
    continue here as well (as they did in 1.1, 1.2, and soon 1.3).

    4. Not many programming books, online tutorials, and school classes about
    Go compared to the same for languages that have been around for 20-50
    years. Of course, but this is a kind of weakness too.

    Even so, most developers would argue that the state of each of the above is
    at least "very good even though not as good as possible" so there is no
    argument against Go use based on these.

    On the other hand, you could argue that Go is efficient, already within a
    small percentage of the fastest performance, is simple in structure and
    easy to learn from Golang.org examples, has a rich standard library, and is
    inspiring new books and training classes each year. It may not be the best
    in these areas, but a continuation of its present arc can make it so. It
    may already be the best combination of "C-like performance and Perl/Java
    ease for Web and server development." For me, it is already the "pleasant
    programming language that I'd prefer to use whenever I can" and that's
    after a long career of developing C/C++ as my native tongue.

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Ukiah Danger Smith wrote:

    I was hoping for more of a healthy discourse, but this thread is terrible.

    Anyone who knows a technology well enough knows it's not perfect and has
    points they want improved even if they love the whole. What are these pain
    points for you.

    And please don't mention generics or package management.





    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
    email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


    --
    *Michael T. Jones | Chief Technology Advocate | mtj@google.com
    <mtj@google.com> | +1 650-335-5765*

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Igor Avdoshkin at Mar 29, 2014 at 4:29 pm
    Google uses in major projects Golang?

    воскресенье, 30 марта 2014 г., 0:01:30 UTC+8 пользователь Michael Jones
    написал:
    Being relatively new, you could say that:

    1. The supporting tools/code are less mature than those of older
    languages. (More Java, JS, C, C++, FORTRAN code, compilers, IDEs, etc. in
    existence.)

    2. The standard compiler suite does not optimize to the level that GCC
    optimizes C & C++. (Though there is GCCGO, and that is arguably standard as
    well)

    3. The Go runtime is a controlling factor in Go performance. It is good
    but continues to evolve. If you look at the evolution of Java and
    Javascript performance over a decade, then you might expect to see gains
    in Go continue here as well (as they did in 1.1, 1.2, and soon 1.3).

    4. Not many programming books, online tutorials, and school classes about
    Go compared to the same for languages that have been around for 20-50
    years. Of course, but this is a kind of weakness too.

    Even so, most developers would argue that the state of each of the above
    is at least "very good even though not as good as possible" so there is no
    argument against Go use based on these.

    On the other hand, you could argue that Go is efficient, already within a
    small percentage of the fastest performance, is simple in structure and
    easy to learn from Golang.org examples, has a rich standard library, and is
    inspiring new books and training classes each year. It may not be the best
    in these areas, but a continuation of its present arc can make it so. It
    may already be the best combination of "C-like performance and Perl/Java
    ease for Web and server development." For me, it is already the "pleasant
    programming language that I'd prefer to use whenever I can" and that's
    after a long career of developing C/C++ as my native tongue.


    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Ukiah Danger Smith <uk...@faction42.com<javascript:>
    wrote:
    I was hoping for more of a healthy discourse, but this thread is terrible.

    Anyone who knows a technology well enough knows it's not perfect and has
    points they want improved even if they love the whole. What are these pain
    points for you.

    And please don't mention generics or package management.





    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 3:43:29 AM UTC-4, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
    email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


    --
    *Michael T. Jones | Chief Technology Advocate | m...@google.com
    <javascript:> | +1 650-335-5765*
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Ian Lance Taylor at Mar 29, 2014 at 4:50 pm

    On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:
    Google uses in major projects Golang?
    Yes.

    Ian

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Brendan Tracey at Mar 29, 2014 at 5:25 pm
    Another weakness is that it in memory intensive relative to tiny systems.
    Having a runtime that does thread scheduling and garbage collection means
    that you can't run go on a system with only a few kilobytes of memory.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Andy Balholm at Mar 29, 2014 at 4:20 pm

    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 12:43:29 AM UTC-7, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:
    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    Compared to dynamically-typed languages and those with extensive
    metaprogramming capabilities, Go is sometimes verbose. (But not as verbose
    as Java)

    Go is often slower than C. (But by a factor of 2 or so, not 150 like Perl.)


    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Patrick Bennett at Mar 29, 2014 at 10:48 pm
    Off the top of my head, some of my nits so far would be:
    * The lack of any kind of a thread-local storage equivalent that provides a
    context for a given stack frame so I can provide better logging functions.
      Without it, I'm forced to create a 'context' struct that has to be passed
    around *everywhere* so that I can provide 'scoped' enter/exit tracing -
    which also means everything I use has to then alter its interface so it can
    take this context. For a lot of code, TLS is seldom needed, but when it
    is... it really stinks to have to work around it.
    * The terrible state of debugging support - gdb is lacking and many of Go's
    features aren't supported within it [you can't pause all but the current
    goroutine for example).
    * Lack of dynamically loaded modules. This isn't a big problem for me
    'yet,' but it drastically changes how Go can be supported for commercial
    software. If you have a bug in a common library used by 800 other modules,
    with DLLs you can just hotfix that one file. If everything is statically
    linked, you have to ship out new versions of all 800 modules. For most
    applications people seem to be developing with Go this seems to be a
    complete non-issue but for it to really compete against C++, being forced
    to always statically link everything is a liability IMO.
    * Inability to force arbitrary RAII resource 'close' scoping - defer always
    goes to the end of the function, not the current scope. You can introduce
    an anonymous function and defer within that, but then a return within the
    anonymous function returns from it, not from the function it is contained
    in - greatly complicating and confusing what should be simple code just to
    get around a defer weakness. While I still think it was hacked in, a C#
    'using' like equivalent would be very helpful.
    * I 'guess' I could say generics - but honestly it hasn't been an issue for
    me so far. I would just hate to see the language go down the path of so
    many others and get so much more complex for very real little gain. I see
    C++ template code often enough that's just horrendous to even figure out
    compilation errors for let alone be able to see what you're really going to
    end up with. Very simple support would probably go a long way. That's
    one of the things I like about Go. Pretty much what you see is what you
    get.

    Patrick

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Caleb Doxsey at Mar 30, 2014 at 2:01 am
    Lack of dlls is a feature in my mind. I've seen the 9th level of dependency
    hell in .Net. It's not a place I ever want to go back too.

    Here are a few deficiencies:

        - Go is not low level enough to convince c programmers to use it.
        - It doesn't give you enough control to convince c++ programmers (or in
        the future rust developers)
        - It's not dynamic or meta enough to convince ruby programmers
        - Go doesn't play well with a functional approach to programming (map,
        filter, reduce, ...)
        - Not that other solutions are great, but Go doesn't have a standard
        package management system (like maven, bundler, npm, ...)
        - Go seems to straddle the fence between languages where the computer
        does exactly what you tell it to (like c, c++, ...) and languages where you
        describe your solution and the computer figures out how to implement it
        (like haskell). For example goroutines and channels are a very high level
        abstraction, but structural types are lower level. This seems to work well,
        but ideologically speaking, given my aversion to magic and my fear of
        abstraction, I wonder what sorts of problems you will run into when trying
        to build a robust, high performance application which pushes your system to
        the limits.
        This sucks in Java, but its a kind of suckage that people have
        experience with.
        - Though strongly opinionated in some ways, Go is very conservative in
        others. Go can feel like you're throwing out the last 10 years of work done
        in other languages, or rather like you're jumping into a conversation with
        someone you've not seen in 20 years. The language throws out more than it
        adds. (though I personally think this is better: generic programming is
        often way too complex, exceptions were probably a bad idea anyway, getting
        rid of null pointers, STM in haskell and all the crazy memory stuff in rust
        are often a whole lot harder to use than just living with the older model)
        - Go is currently a fad. In a year or two something else will take over.
        Will companies still care about Go after that? Will skills in the language
        still be useful? As a developer things like Java are still a safer bet.
        - Poor 3rd party library support. Both in terms of there's not
        necessarily a lot of libraries, and in terms of the reliability of what is
        out there. For example there's like 40 forks of the AWS library, all of
        them incomplete in various ways.
        - Poor IDE and 3rd party tool support. I agree with the comment about
        poor debugging. I've been spoiled by intellij.
        - Go isn't the most inter-operable language. You can't use it in your
        browser and you can't use it on your phone. (and given the move to cloud
        and mobile that's a whole lot of the development space)

    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 4:48:45 PM UTC-6, Patrick Bennett wrote:

    Off the top of my head, some of my nits so far would be:
    * The lack of any kind of a thread-local storage equivalent that provides
    a context for a given stack frame so I can provide better logging
    functions. Without it, I'm forced to create a 'context' struct that has to
    be passed around *everywhere* so that I can provide 'scoped' enter/exit
    tracing - which also means everything I use has to then alter its interface
    so it can take this context. For a lot of code, TLS is seldom needed, but
    when it is... it really stinks to have to work around it.
    * The terrible state of debugging support - gdb is lacking and many of
    Go's features aren't supported within it [you can't pause all but the
    current goroutine for example).
    * Lack of dynamically loaded modules. This isn't a big problem for me
    'yet,' but it drastically changes how Go can be supported for commercial
    software. If you have a bug in a common library used by 800 other modules,
    with DLLs you can just hotfix that one file. If everything is statically
    linked, you have to ship out new versions of all 800 modules. For most
    applications people seem to be developing with Go this seems to be a
    complete non-issue but for it to really compete against C++, being forced
    to always statically link everything is a liability IMO.
    * Inability to force arbitrary RAII resource 'close' scoping - defer
    always goes to the end of the function, not the current scope. You can
    introduce an anonymous function and defer within that, but then a return
    within the anonymous function returns from it, not from the function it is
    contained in - greatly complicating and confusing what should be simple
    code just to get around a defer weakness. While I still think it was
    hacked in, a C# 'using' like equivalent would be very helpful.
    * I 'guess' I could say generics - but honestly it hasn't been an issue
    for me so far. I would just hate to see the language go down the path of
    so many others and get so much more complex for very real little gain. I
    see C++ template code often enough that's just horrendous to even figure
    out compilation errors for let alone be able to see what you're really
    going to end up with. Very simple support would probably go a long way.
    That's one of the things I like about Go. Pretty much what you see is
    what you get.

    Patrick
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Luu hoo at Mar 30, 2014 at 1:23 am
    Lack of powerful IDE.In fact,Go already has most of the tool chains and supports
    good tooling <http://talks.golang.org/2012/splash.article#TOC_17.> by
    design.

    在 2014年3月29日星期六UTC+8下午3时43分29秒,Igor Avdoshkin写道:
    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • RickyS at Mar 30, 2014 at 11:17 am
    No decimal data type. Used for financial processing.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Martin Drlík at Mar 30, 2014 at 11:30 am
    I would say Golang has no real weakness. Maybe less than few gotchas for
    newcomers, but all things are logical and become known easily though.
    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 8:43:29 AM UTC+1, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • Henrik Johansson at Mar 30, 2014 at 7:31 pm
    There are of course some weaknesses but that is of course based on the
    context of your application.
    Michael listed some possible suggestions in a rather fair way.

    Still Go is a breath of fresh air and is a joy to use despite some of these
    short comings and because some of the other!

    On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Martin Drlík wrote:

    I would say Golang has no real weakness. Maybe less than few gotchas for
    newcomers, but all things are logical and become known easily though.
    On Saturday, March 29, 2014 8:43:29 AM UTC+1, Igor Avdoshkin wrote:

    Hello! From a practical point of view, what are the weaknesses in the
    language Golang?
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
    email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase