[vimsee]

Why does it need to be the best in one single metric when it can be great in many?

It is an order of magnitude faster than Python. So it is well suited for performance in many cases.

It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++. So it is well suited for smaller programs.

I can see Go as a very good middle-ground.

[shrimp_emoji]

> It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++.

That's why corporations like Google invent "middle-ground" languages.

Go from Google

Java from Oracle

C# from Microsoft

These companies need some performance, but they can't hire enough C/C++/Rust devs (not enough exist). They're flush with JS/Python devs, but those languages are too slow.

So they invent these abominable "middle-level" languages, with their insane bloat.

For myself, I'm not interested in mediocrity to serve corporate interests, so I don't touch them. :p Extremes only: Python and C; Ruby and Rust; JS and C++.

[hobos_delight]

> Java from Oracle

Oracle acquired Java with Sun Microsystems, it was originally designed for embedded systems and the dream of “write once, run everywhere”.

The idea of a “hardware JVM” always fascinated me, I seem to recall some parallax microcontrollers that could run a subset of jvm bytecode back in the 90s, but never actually got to play with them.

[benterix]

> It is a lot easier to pick up than C/C++.

I would say, "it is a lot easier to pick up than C++" as the language specification is much smaller. I wouldn't be so sure about the comparison to C, though.

[usrbinbash]

The fact that Go doesn't have C's macros alone already makes it a lot simpler.

And please don't get me started on writing concurrent code in C.