
Why the Go Language Won't Be Successful - wkoszek
http://www.koszek.com/blog/2015/07/22/why-the-go-wont-be-successful/#.Va_YVVCSRCo.hackernews
======
tobz
The only thing that seems like it's missing here, in the instructions for the
project, are that it should be pulled down with _go get_ instead of _git
clone_ , which would have resolved the dependencies for you.

Obviously, correct me if I'm wrong, but... that doesn't ever actually change
for any other language. You still do a _pip install_ or an _npm install_ and
then another command to run and/or compile your code.

So, really, it's a documentation failure, and on the part of the project
authors, at that. You never used Go prior, so you didn't know to use _go get_.
You used Python, Node.js, etc for a first time, too, at some point, and the
only reasonable conclusion is that you also didn't know to use <insert
language-package-manager-relevant command here> that first time, either.
Unless, of course, the project you were using it for documented that. Or you
went off and searched for it yourself.

------
rhodysurf
I mean yeah it may not be as conveinent as pip or npm, but neither of those
allows you create and distribute a statically linked binary either. Go
probably wasn't for you, but in many places npm or pip will not be installed
and its a lot easier to give someone a single binary than tell them they have
to install python or node.

~~~
wkoszek
You're right. I like the fact that it compiles to a single binary, but getting
it to work is a PITA.

------
dekhn
Go is already successful- based on its current market share and growth rate,
it will easily be one of the top ten languages for the next 10 years.

So that part of your conclusion is wrong, factually.

~~~
dragonwriter
Did you just say the extrapolation of current trends into the future establish
a _fact_ about what the future will be that enables you to reject a prediction
as "wrong, factually"?

~~~
dekhn
No. I said it is already successful. Then I said, based on trends, it's likely
to become one of the most successful.

------
mathgeek
> As a FreeBSD person...

Much as I like FreeBSD, ease of use on it is rarely a predictor for whether a
language is successful or not (so long as it can be made to run on it).

~~~
wkoszek
Do you think that Python/Ruby would be as popular as they are right now if
they were hard to even start to run?

~~~
mathgeek
That's a rhetorical question, and not something that I'd say is relevant. My
point was and remains that if compiling from source on FreeBSD is doable but
takes some effort, it's not a brick wall for language adoption.

~~~
merb
Also compiling C could be quite hard If you don't use tools like make,
autoconf, etc.. I mean statically link to all places could be quite hard..

------
merb
really curious, somebody who writes CSH Scripts can't install go. That makes
no fucking sense. I thought people working on Unix/Linux reading manuals.. And
aren't just robots. Currently the article is definitely plain stupid.

