Hacker News Reader

> Which is why Golang has exploded recently: it gives you static typing security of Java with a coding workflow of an interpreted language.

Sure, it has similar static typing to Java, but it also has the same coding workflow as any other compiled environment, not the workflow of an interpreted environment.

View on HN

I believe parent comment was probably alluding to compilation time. My experience with Go is that the compile times are usually close to zero seconds and this indeed makes it feel almost exactly like working with Python or JavaScript.

Parent may also have been thinking of Go's concision, which feels more like using a scripting language than using a class-based monstrosity like Java, and certain other features, such as type inference that make variable declaration as painless as weakly typed languages.

As far as verbose vs. concise (including the impact of type inference), I don't see Go as being much like a dynamically typed language. Sure, it is a bit lighter than Java, but for nontrivial code you still end up with plenty of type system related cruft -- a lot more than in Haskell, which is on of the few static languages which is anywhere close to dynamic languages in terms of being concise and having little of the empty type-related ritual that plagues most other static-typed languages.

Yes and yes, exactly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com