UMBC ebiquity
A review of the Google Go programming language

A review of the Google Go programming language

Tim Finin, 12:15am 12 November 2009

Mark Chu-Carroll is a Google software engineer who’s written a long, detailed and informed review of Google’s new programming language Go. It’s worth a read if you are interested in understanding what it’s like as a programming language. Here’s a few points that I took note of.

    “The guys who designed Go were very focused on keeping things as small and simple as possible. When you look at it in contrast to a language like C++, it’s absolutely striking. Go is very small, and very simple. There’s no cruft. No redundancy. Everything has been pared down. But for the most part, they give you what you need. If you want a C-like language with some basic object-oriented features and garbage collection, Go is about as simple as you could realistically hope to get.”

    “The most innovative thing about it is its type system. … It ends up giving you something with the flavor of Python-ish duck typing, but with full type-checking from the compiler.”

    “Go programs compile really astonishingly quickly. When I first tried it, I thought that I had made a mistake building the compiler. It was just too damned fast. I’d never seen anything quite like it.”

    “At the end of the day, what do I think? I like Go, but I don’t love it. If it had generics, it would definitely be my favorite of the C/C++/C#/Java family. It’s got a very elegant simplicity to it which I really like. The interface type system is wonderful. The overall structure of programs and modules is excellent. But it’s got some ugliness. … It’s not going to wipe C++ off the face of the earth. But I think it will establish itself as a solid alternative.”

Go sounds like a language that will help you grow as a computer scientist if you use it. That’s a good enough recommendation for me.


One Response to “A review of the Google Go programming language”

  1. Itransition Says:

    One may like Go programming language or dislike it but the name isn’t friendly for search engines. But keeping aside the brand policy I hope the new technology promotes software system development more applicable.