Though I think I *do* agree with you on that particular point (zero-value design), I'd say this argument is rarely a real one. Let me explain myself: However clever Google's thousands of programmers are, there might be places for improvement and I personally want people to try and propose evolutions they consider positive for the language and everything gravitating around it, so we can discuss it together (I mean the community, of course) . That part seems to be a dead end (at least from the angle we have taken here), but if every time someone had a thought about a way to improve the language, the first thing they'd say was "Google's programmers have already thought about that so there's nothing to be done", Go wouldn't be the language it is today. There will always be "rough edges", particularly because the concept of "being a programmer" evolves in itself.
So, yes, and I honestly think you didn't mean we should fall in the other extreme behaviour, but I just wanted to state that, IMO, that is the last argument to consider. :) Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 17:32, Brian Candler <b.cand...@pobox.com> a écrit : > On Wednesday, 19 February 2020 10:59:33 UTC, klos...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> I see in a programming language as my most important tool. I use it every >> single day to make a living. It is because of that importance that I want >> me (and my team) to be as efficient as possible when working with it, so >> every detail matters a lot. When you create small short-living >> applications, it is ok if the language is not perfect. >> > ... > >> It is because I like so much the way Go approaches programming that I >> would love to polish those edges that, in my opinion, do make a difference. >> > > You seem to be implying that the Go language designers have not thought > about these "rough edges". > > Perhaps if you read some of the Go history, and the design documents, you > will find that these issues *have* been considered, in very great detail, > and there are very good reasons for how things were chosen today. Not > because they couldn't be bothered to think of the perfect solution, but > because in fact the solutions they have come up with have been very > carefully chosen indeed. > > Go came from Google. Google has thousands of programmers. It is in > Google's interest for the language to be as usable, understandable, > efficient and productive as possible. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/6bb009a2-a63e-4a76-a8d6-3d6c1287f78b%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/6bb009a2-a63e-4a76-a8d6-3d6c1287f78b%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CANgi337FYLxawe5Tqmf%3D%3Dy_n0g6JTWXv-2SCvk9x6MaHh68dfQ%40mail.gmail.com.
