[nepeckman]

I'm only really interested in learning a language if it excites me, or if I'm getting paid to do it. I don't hate Go, and would be fine to learn it on company time for company projects, but there is no spark that would lead me to learn the language on my own. I've written some basic Go, but if I'm using it in personal projects, I'd would have to invest time to understand the ecosystem, runtime, standard lib, best practices, etc.

[naikrovek]

> but there is no spark that would lead me to learn the language on my own.

you just said you wanted to write SSH apps. is that not enough of a spark?

[ryukoposting]

This is roughly my take. Between Nim and Rust, I have no purpose for Go that isn't covered by a language that's flat-out better.

[philosopher1234]

They’re not better.

[lazyier]

Being boring is one of Golang's strongest suits. There just isn't a whole lot you need to learn compared to most languages.

[pstuart]

It's not exciting but it is pleasing. The ecosystem is refining well (e.g., $GOPATH deprecated and workspaces just added).

Now with generics there's even less to complain about.

[anyfoo]

It's not really very pleasant if you are used to modern type systems. It feels antiquated in a limiting way, for no good reason.

With C at least it's clear to me that it's literally (very literally) a 50 years old language, and I've gotten used to it after decades. It's far from ideal, but at least there's some deep familiarity, and that coupled with the fact that it's everywhere makes me feel more tolerant of it.

But learning a new language which is, in some ways, stuck in the same past as that established 50 years old language is not very pleasing.