Languages like Go, Rust, and now Swift are not only great from almost every aspect over the last generation languages like C, C++, Java, but a lot noobs or scripting language developers are also converting to more low level languages. So the barrier to pick up a lower level language and become productive in it has really diminished.
Go has had a head start and introduced minimal simplicity. It's a great/powerful language and almost everybody can pick it up quickly within a few days. I wouldn't listen to people who dismiss the language for its lack of "features" and have never written more than "hello world" in it.
Swift is "important" because of Apple & iOS. It has a much steeper learning curve than Go and naturally it takes a few weeks of dedication to get comfortable with it. However, once you overcome the introductory challenge then you'll start to appreciate the language and its capabilities.
Already the job market for both languages are really high with higher than average salaries. So learning/mastering both Go and Swift is the best decision you can make.
In my area we use Go for some systems but found it scales badly from an engineering point of view to larger more complicated systems, compared to languages like Java and Scala. The JVM has much more mature tooling and libraries too.
For mobile applications it will be a while until Swift is stable on Android, so some of the cross platform languages would be a good choice. React Native, Unity, Unreal for example.
They both solve a lot of the same problems, but lots of people will go for Kotlin just for static typing.
Also, dynamic languages like Groovy take a performance hit. Static typed JVM bytecode runs faster than dynamic bytecode.
Whether either of those are relevant to your application really depends, but Kotlin definitely is going to gain some followers due to it's differences from Groovy.
Guillaume Laforge is NOT the creator of the Groovy Language, James Strachan is. And Swift did not take inspiration from Groovy.
What else is inaccurate in the article? 6 months after it was written, Pivotal voted against Groovy's diversion into static typing and Android development by retrenching Laforge and the programmer working on it.
I fully agree that Go is a poor language if you are building a large, monolithic application.
I find that statement hilarious considering that it was explicitly one of the design considerations for Go. So they either failed massively, or there's a difference in perspective on what a good language for programming in the large is.
From Rob Pike's talk:
> Go was designed to address the problems faced in software development at Google, which led to a language that is not a breakthrough research language but is nonetheless an excellent tool for engineering large software projects.
That doesn't mean much, if anything. One of the design considerations for Java was "write once, run everywhere" and that didn't turn out that well either.
Most languages make failed or semi-failed promises.
And their idea of addressing software development at scale, might not be 2015's idea of doing the same.
Aside from Google, most other teams I've read using Go are more often than not writing small or medium-sized services, no big applications or highly complicated stuff.
Isn't it hilarious that a statement from the Go authors could be used as evidence of its awesomeness given how the authors are naturally and heavily biased?
Google doesn't use Go at such large scale though. Some projects here and there, and most of them small for all I've read. The most publicly celebrated ones being a MySQL front-end for YouTube and a caching-layer (?) for Google Downloads. Not exactly earth shattering applications.
Which again is not "at scale" (except in the sense that this automation manages thousands of servers etc).
It's what people used to use Tcl, Perl, Python, etc for.