Why go sucks

* goto
* bad exception handling
* no generics; they latter added a hack for this this as a macro
* reminder that go programs just download whatever the fuck off github and call it good and run it. and cant even remember specific versions of them so you are ultrafucked if they ever change

Go is like the Tea Party of programming: everyone knows their ideas are shit but they're REALLY REALLY OPINIONATED about them so it's not even worth arguing.

Goto is a plus

Haskell is like the Liberals of programming: everyone knows their ideas are pseudo-intellectual and out of touch with reality but they're REALLY REALLY OPINIONATED about them so it's not even worth arguing.

Lisp is like the Greek God of programming: everyone knows his ideas are genius and that he's beautiful but everyone not him is REALLY REALLY insecure about their inferiority so it's not even worth arguing.

>>2
You might be a retard!

http://www.fastcodesign.com/3039705/why-comic-sans-works-so-well-on-the-i-cant-breathe-shirts

>>2
You're an anus!

Nothing wrong with goto
Exception handling is shit, go had a better but not optimal way of handling errors.

* reminder that go programs just download whatever the fuck off github and call it good and run it. and cant even remember specific versions of them so you are ultrafucked if they ever change

This makes no sense

What's a tea party? When a girl has a party for her birthday and calls her friend to drink tea together?

>>8

Exception handling is shit, go had a better but not optimal way of handling errors.

It is, but I'm not sure Go's is really any better.

Nonlocal mechanisms (exceptions and the like) are fast but always introduce instability. More durable solutions like monads are just too slow for most people though.

This makes no sense

Welcome to Go. Those problems aren't specific to Go but they did a spectacularly bad job.

What's a tea party?

It's like a lemon party only there are twice as many assholes and a lot more opinions.

>>8

Nothing wrong with goto

goto is considered harmful.

This makes no sense

github links inside your go source code. The go tool downloads them automatically. Easily easily get owned this way.

>>10

goto is considered harmful.

Cargo cultist. You know that Dijkstra rant was specifically aimed at FORTRAN right? Oh right, you don't. goto is not harmful in the large.

>>11

Oh right, you don't.

You're right, I don't know that. I know that it wasn't though!

It's because goto breaks your ability to reason about a program. Good luck proving your spagetti correct. The only reason people like you demand goto so much is that you feel afraid without it, you don't know how to program properly and you need a life raft to get out of a the hell holes your program yourself into.

>>12
Think of it like alcohol. You use goto once, your <15-line function is a little more succinct and a little less indented. You put it everywhere like a total fucking moron and you end up a drunken mess on the street.
Evidently you must be projecting. You must have had some troubles with alcohol or you haven't got a clue what you're on about.

>>12
It breaks your "ability to reason about a program" BECAUSE YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD.

Even a little kid can follow the lines of a flowchart.

Dijkstra was complaining about the idiots who used goto excessively, jumping back and forth for no good reason. These same idiots would make a mess (see: enterprise Java) even without goto.

>>14

It breaks your "ability to reason about a program" BECAUSE YOU'RE A FUCKING RETARD.

it's not because my a fucking retard, it's because it changes you ability to reason about the program from static to dynamic. Flow chart approach isn't tenable for statically analyzing a program, yes even an idiot can follow a flow chart around but that's because it's operational. Grasping for operational understanding of code instead of a declarative one is what lower beings like goto users require.

Dijkstra was complaining about the idiots who used goto excessively

he actually wasn't and this isn't why I'm against goto. you're absolutely right that people will make a huge mess out of anything.

it changes you ability to reason about the program from static to dynamic.

In what universe? goto is more static than motherfucking if.

>>14
carter suck me willy carter sucksucksuck

>>15

it's because it changes you ability to reason about the program from static to dynamic

So what?

Flow chart approach isn't tenable for statically analyzing a program

I can statically analyse flowcharts just fine. Using big words like "tenable" or "operational" does not help your argument either.

>>12
There is absolutely nothing wrong with goto. Every statement that produce branching is translated in assembly as a jmp, je, jne, etc, anyways... so basically, only a faggot who is afraid of things that do not understand consider goto something ``harmful''.

>>19
There is absolutely nothing wrong with racism

summoning the necro dubs bumper

(this dub intentionally left checked)

>>19
"Goto considered harmful" is literally a meme. That's not even what Djikstra wanted to call the article. And yes, on typical architectures, pretty much all control flow structures are implemented as the equivalent of goto. It only became problematic when languages like BASIC made it easy for idiots to program, and goto based code is easy for an idiot to screw up, since all it takes is a typo to send your program to the wrong line (and in some cases the problem might not be immediately noticeable). Structured programming protects the programmer from this - it's nearly impossible to jump into the middle of the wrong subroutine by accident, usually the program will just fail to compile.

>>23
Thats exactly why Java enterprise solutions exist.

bro do u even Hindley–Milner

>>1
Go might be bad, but it's a lot better than C.

delete Cudder;

>>26
fuck off fakeCudder-kunt