[gameswithgo]

I don't think Go's documentation is better than Rust, Go is just a lot simpler than Rust. Especially if you are a programmer with a background in any of the C-ish syntax languages (C,C++, javascript, Java, C#, etc), its just really easy to pick up.

Rust is a mind bending ordeal by comparison with both the borrow checker and other foreign ideas that take a while to come to terms with.

[Matl]

> I don't think Go's documentation is better than Rust, Go is just a lot simpler than Rust.

Having used both I disagree; Go's stdlib is extremely well documented, even unexported types are along with examples etc. Rust docs are useful but more often feel like there's many things you're expected to figure out from the source and only minimal examples are given.

I am a fan of Rust, but I think Go's docs are an example to follow. The more complex the language, the richer docs it should have imo.

Quite aside from docs, Go's tooling situation is also better.

[tptacek]

They both have good patches of documentation and bad ones. They're both better documented than, say, Ruby. Go has multiple edges, not just simplicity, but also a larger user base. You couldn't reasonably disqualify either language basd on their documentation. Certainly, Go is easier to pick up than Rust, but nobody's arguing that.