7/26/2026 at 5:07:50 PM
You guys can keep complaining about how go is too verbose, but I love everything about go.I love the error handling, I love the forced formatting, i love all the linting it has including style guides. When you read other source code it's so easy to understand it and make sense of it. Thank you go team
(Ok, maybe I am a bit sceptical with the latest generic additions, but overall it's a great language. I love it.)
by b7e7d855b448
7/26/2026 at 5:41:53 PM
Oh yeah totally agree. I don't understand why someone would want to write `slices.Contains(s, needle)` when you can write this beautiful poem like a Shakespeare in VSCode: found := false
for _, v := range s {
if v == needle {
found = true
break
}
}
if err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("my function name but in spaces: %w", err);
}
by wannabe44
7/26/2026 at 9:17:20 PM
> Because having any language facilities for error handling is harmful.No, making error handling verbose mandatory is meant to make developers do mental cardio and be mindful of what they are doing.
You can either keep developers mindful or punish them after they make a mistake by shouting at them and make them waste their time during re-compiling.
P.S.: Yes, I love Go's error handling mechanics, which makes handling errors mandatory, not optional, and if you ignore the error, this is a deliberate choice and the burden is on the developer. Go does the former, Rust does the latter.
by bayindirh
7/26/2026 at 6:33:14 PM
I don't say it's perfect, but right in this moment I feel most comfortable with go and I don't mind jumping through a few hoops or writing things multiple timesby b7e7d855b448
7/26/2026 at 5:56:03 PM
Your handwritten one has a major performance bug: found := false
for _, v := range s {
if v == needle {
found = true
break
}
}
If you'd used `slices.Contains(s, needle)`, on the other hand, it could have such a performance bug in it and you'd never know.
by logicchains
7/26/2026 at 7:23:01 PM
> If you'd used `slices.Contains(s, needle)`, on the other hand, it could have such a performance bug in it and you'd never know.Perhaps you're much better at programming than I am, but I prefer these semantics in a language because I figure they're much more likely to have been optimized empirically, support vectorization, and be less buggy than another rote loop I'm trying to speed through.
by kajman
7/26/2026 at 8:59:22 PM
You're right. Just for information, slices.Contains() uses the index, not a copied value.https://cs.opensource.google/go/go/+/refs/tags/go1.26.5:src/...
by irq-1
7/26/2026 at 7:37:27 PM
or contains() could be written by those who can write performant code, ..onceby boredatoms
7/26/2026 at 7:19:48 PM
> on the other hand, it could have such a performance bug in it and you'd never know.wut...? the debate isn't between closed (incompetent) source and open (competent) source - the debate is between verbose language and expressive language.
by mathisfun123
7/26/2026 at 6:05:42 PM
You forgot to put /s after your post.by msie
7/26/2026 at 8:59:23 PM
100% with you on every point. It's the only language I've worked in that lets me read other codebases without an hour or two of "wut?" happening, so they did something right!by BobbyJo
7/26/2026 at 6:44:03 PM
> I love the error handlingEven if you prefer manually checking for errors after every call that might fail, I fail to see how one can love go’s verbosity. Compare go’s
foo, err := bar()
if err != nil {
return ERR;
}
foo := bar() ||| return ERR;
by Someone
7/26/2026 at 8:48:53 PM
I do love the batteries included attitude. Having benchmarking included as well as a mechanism to run tests to check (test) for race-conditions right from the language/build tool is amazing.My only wish is that go could become less verbose. There are several frontends to go that are more compact, compile down into golang, and then let you enjoy all the benefits.
by spockz
7/26/2026 at 7:04:48 PM
I love how during prototyping, the compiler will tell me off for having an unused variable and fail to compile. I totally love the idea of crashing when writing on a closed channel.by eptcyka
7/26/2026 at 5:18:14 PM
If generics were going to ruin the language, they would have by now. I think you can rest easy.by jerf
7/26/2026 at 5:41:10 PM
The greatest thing about generics is … that they're not used much if at all.Which is a great way to make sure they're not overused, which in my experience is better than underuse.
by ncruces
7/26/2026 at 6:37:22 PM
It doesn't have a lot of style guides or linting though. You have to install and configure quite a lot of tooling for thatby gempir