It's not like there are alternatives. Don't even mention Golang - it's a piece of dried up crap with arbitrary limitations (error handling from the 90ties, no ability to implement datastructures with native api, no operator overloading). Might as well use Pascal ...
It seems to me that just few bratty library developers (shamed by their users into fixing their shit to support Python 3) are the main detractors.
Now start downvoting ... cause we all love Armin and his unconstructive bitching.
What is unsafe about it? You you still need to have type assertions before you can actually use interface{} object as an actual data type and the type assertions give you the type safety. It is not any less safe than a python equivalent if that is where you are coming from.
Why have static types in a language where you need runtime checks to replace all but the simplest uses for a type system. Even java learned this lesson.
Java is more verbose than necessary. For example in Scala there's https://github.com/mandubian/play-json-zipper this for example. But how is it more painful than Go? Json is a very simple type to represent, after all. Whatever Go has can be emulated by pre generics java. After all, their type systems would be equivalent modulo structural typing.
8
u/jm_ May 26 '14
It's not like there are alternatives. Don't even mention Golang - it's a piece of dried up crap with arbitrary limitations (error handling from the 90ties, no ability to implement datastructures with native api, no operator overloading). Might as well use Pascal ...
It seems to me that just few bratty library developers (shamed by their users into fixing their shit to support Python 3) are the main detractors.
Now start downvoting ... cause we all love Armin and his unconstructive bitching.