IMHO, Python is more work to develop in than Go. Haven't worked in PHP or Ruby in over a decade, but I suspect they're just as bad. Go requires a bit more typing, but the result is more likely to be correct and when it's not correct it's easier to figure out why than in Python. In my experience, typing isn't the thing that slows me down, it's when something goes wrong and the language doesn't have the ability to help me quickly resolve the problem. Go is just way better at this than the "higher" level languages. More on reddit.com

Contra the assumptions of many Go detractors, I have in fact programmed in the supposed Promised Land. I have used many dynamic scripting languages, and I learned them very deeply. I have used Haskell to do non-trivial work. (Not huge work, but non-trivial, not just "I played with it a bit".) I too know how to use one-liners to take some dictionary and transform it into some other completely different dictionary while filtering out the empty items and some other fiddly detail. And what I noticed, years before Go was even at 1.0, is that my professional code kept getting simpler and simpler. My biggest shared code base was Perl, and while it may have a bad rep as line noise, it is another language that had a lot of the nice features I'm supposedly missing from Go. I noticed using the clever stuff (not always mine) was where bugs arose. My fellow programmers wouldn't understand it until I blew it back out into simple code, with intermediate variable names, and places to comment on things, and then it would stop being a problematic part of the code. Perl had all sorts of support for all sorts of things and on the net I was removing them. I would do one thing on one line even if it was easy to do more. Where I ultimately ended up is that my other code converged at roughly Go's level of verbosity anyhow. So using Go turns out not to be that much of an impediment. Now, the error handling is a bit more verbose, yes, but I also find I'm often doing things in those handlers by the time code gets to production. Just blindly returning errors is not something you should do; you should definitely think about the situation first. And a lot of times Go has a quite nice solution to some problem. It isn't that I don't understand how to use all the line-saving techniques. I understand them very well. It is that I also understand that those have costs. In particular, the main problem with clever code is that your code is being read by not particularly smart developers. I don't just mean that in an inegalitarian way (though I do not subscribe to the idea that everyone is equally talented in every way), but there is also the much bigger problem that even if a developer is reading your code that can figure out what it is doing if they puzzle over every line, the most common case that your code will be read, it is being read by a developer who doesn't want to apply that much brain power. They are not here to read your code and get a thrill about how amazingly concise it is. They are here to solve a problem. They are not studying your code, they are skimming it to try to find their problem. Your code should be skimmable, and that means that you don't write in a style where every character has Phenomenal Cosmic Meaning. You write code in a highly idiomatic manner, that does nothing surprising, and does not have little clever bombs in it all the time. All that said, there are things that are missing from Go that I would like from that world. It is again not that I don't understand the virtue of sum types and the other techniques. It's just that considered wholistically, even in those cases where I would see them as net positive, I see them as less net positive than many do, because I've seen what happens when I throw a huge chunk of very complicated code at the average developer, versus much simpler code. I can do some nice things with sum types; I've seen developers seriously screw them and those other nice features up, though, and when they do, my oh my is that the worst mess you've seen. In a nutshell, I'd rather apply my cleverness to finding simple solutions that can be understood by other developers, even ones not applying their full brain power, than wielding complicated tools to create complicated solutions full of surprising corner cases. (Go has corner cases, of course, but they generally aren't surprising, which still makes them better than surprising corner cases.) All in all, as a professional programming language I find it makes very good tradeoffs. It isn't perfect for everything and there are tasks I wouldn't blink at dropping Go and reaching for Rust or something, where the additional load on developers is actually a net savings in the long term. But it is much better than the people who just want to show off how clever they are realize. More on reddit.com

it isn't. you either like it or you don't imo. they all do the same things. when I started writing Go, I liked it and I ditched node, which I moved to after PHP/laravel. More on reddit.com

Go should be at least 80x faster than python. More on reddit.com