<story><title>Why I Don&apos;t Like Golang (2016)</title><url>https://www.teamten.com/lawrence/writings/why-i-dont-like-go.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>voidfunc</author><text>When developers who usually make 6 figures of money complain about $90&amp;#x2F;yr IDE price I just cannot help laugh. Actually it&amp;#x27;s even better... the price elevators down from $90 -&amp;gt; year2 90 - 20% -&amp;gt; year3 90 - 40%.&lt;p&gt;Over three years that&amp;#x27;s like $150-$200 total and it will save you so many headaches. But that&amp;#x27;s a steep price? Are you kidding? Why do developers hate tools that cost money when they save them time and allow them to do more?</text></item><item><author>implying</author><text>They&amp;#x27;ve fixed the import &amp;#x2F; modules situation to a point where it&amp;#x27;s usable and much improved, and generics have been added.&lt;p&gt;However, the issue this brings up about structs &amp;#x2F; types not explicitly declaring which interfaces they implement is a real and unaddressed problem, especially in large codebases. The only tool that I&amp;#x27;m aware of that finds implementations is GoLand, at steep JetBrains prices.&lt;p&gt;Figuring out what type an API is asking for should not require reading every line of code in the package, and slows down every developer of large Go projects</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kstenerud</author><text>Sorry, no. I have JetBrains and have since stopped using it for go development. It&amp;#x27;s too slow, too buggy, and lacks the ecosystem that VS code has. I still use it for Java because the rest are even worse&lt;p&gt;A language that depends too much on IDE integration for usability is a real problem, because now you have tool fragmentation as everyone goes different routes with varying levels of success to fix the deficiencies in your language. In the end you end up rolling your own tools as I have done, which is the absolute WORST of all worlds.&lt;p&gt;Go was supposed to be &lt;i&gt;simple&lt;/i&gt;, but all it succeeded in doing is shifting the complexity elsewhere and calling mission accomplished. When you&amp;#x27;re designing a language, it&amp;#x27;s VERY important to understand the difference between the emergent complexity of the domain, and the inherent complexity of your design. The latter can be fixed, the former can only be managed - in ways that are already well researched (or just swept under the rug, as go has done).&lt;p&gt;Too much magic and too much &amp;quot;clever&amp;quot; re-purposing of existing paradigms (file names, capitalization, implicit contracts, etc) makes for an infuriatingly bad design.</text></comment>
<story><title>Why I Don&apos;t Like Golang (2016)</title><url>https://www.teamten.com/lawrence/writings/why-i-dont-like-go.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>voidfunc</author><text>When developers who usually make 6 figures of money complain about $90&amp;#x2F;yr IDE price I just cannot help laugh. Actually it&amp;#x27;s even better... the price elevators down from $90 -&amp;gt; year2 90 - 20% -&amp;gt; year3 90 - 40%.&lt;p&gt;Over three years that&amp;#x27;s like $150-$200 total and it will save you so many headaches. But that&amp;#x27;s a steep price? Are you kidding? Why do developers hate tools that cost money when they save them time and allow them to do more?</text></item><item><author>implying</author><text>They&amp;#x27;ve fixed the import &amp;#x2F; modules situation to a point where it&amp;#x27;s usable and much improved, and generics have been added.&lt;p&gt;However, the issue this brings up about structs &amp;#x2F; types not explicitly declaring which interfaces they implement is a real and unaddressed problem, especially in large codebases. The only tool that I&amp;#x27;m aware of that finds implementations is GoLand, at steep JetBrains prices.&lt;p&gt;Figuring out what type an API is asking for should not require reading every line of code in the package, and slows down every developer of large Go projects</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>faitswulff</author><text>I would be more supportive of this message if it was a $90 LSP server that you could support by buying (a la intelephense), but software developers are very opinionated about their editors and not everyone wants to use IntelliJ products.</text></comment>