theoryofx

And yet most people who inherited the same as he did would have done nothing of note with it and faded into obscurity. Like most of the Macedonian kings before and not long after.

Reality is complicated...

Just throwing it in here in case it helps someone: if you have migraines, get an eye exam to check if you need glasses (you might not realize it!) and that your prescription is still sufficient.

He's been posting on Twitter obsessively for years now, it's definitely one of his worst addictions. He blew $44 billion to satisfy his cravings, which has to be a record spend on an addiction.

But he's also addicted to drugs, work, gaming and who knows what else.

He will either shake his demons or die early after having destroyed his life and probably many other people's lives. I wish him well for everyone's sake.

I really thought his inauguration performance (the drugs, the saluting) would finally wake people up to what's going on what Elon Musk.

To anyone who can see it (maybe it takes some relevant life experience), it's patently obvious he's been spiraling down a dark hole of drugs, depression, ego, burn out, and addiction.

He's in a very dark place and lashing out, hurting himself and others, like so many people in dark places do.

The man desperately needs help, as much as someone on the street doing fentanyl does. But being rich can actually make it harder to get clean. Wealth can insulate a person from consequences, which can make it harder to hit rock bottom which is often the wake up call people need to shock themselves out of their problem.

Elon Musk isn't the devil, he's actually good and useful person deep down, but right now he's fighting demons and they're winning.

Not really because "Staff software engineer" has become the new "Senior Software Engineer" due to title inflation. It's become an essentially meaningless distinction at many companies.

Case in point, this person has around around 7 years of professional experience at just two companies, Zendesk and GitHub. I don't mean this as a personal dig in any way (truly) but this simply isn't what we used to mean by a "Staff" level software engineer.

This person is early-mid career, which we used to just call "Software engineer" then "Senior Software Engineer" and now (often enough) "Staff Software Engineer"

Well these are just anecdotes but "five times the amount of code" is an outlandish claim. I've done direct ports of code written in more expressive languages (Python, Scala, others) to Go, and also created SDKs in multiple languages at the same time, and I've never seen anything close to 5x.

Go is certainly more verbose than the more expressive languages but the code is also usually much more robust and reliable in my experience, due to strong types, error handling, the well tested standard library.

On your example, the for loop verbosity is a bit annoying and I'm happy that go 1.23 got user defined iterators to help with this https://tip.golang.org/doc/go1.23#iterators

There are some useful features that Go really should add, and enums might be one of them, but lacking a useful feature doesn't mean its not well designed.

The results are in for Go. It's already one of the most successful programming languages in history any way you measure it.

Of course Go should continue to improve and add features where the value outweighs the increased complexity. That's how it eventually got generic functions and other features.

time.Time uses its own epoch internally but has methods like .Unix() which convert to Unix epoch time. Never seen this be a problem.

The criticism that Go is for "average programmers" almost universally comes from people overestimating how good they are.

I've worked directly with hundreds of highly paid programmers over decades. I can count on my fingers the number that would be at all constrained by using Go where it's a suitable choice (an important caveat).

The rest would have their work highly improved by using Go as much as possible, precisely because it's harder to write bad code in Go compared with most languages.

You can point out flaws so it's not well designed? By this logic nothing is.

And pointing out missing features in a programming language is just about the weakest criticism possible.

Piling on lots of features is easy and fun. That's why almost all language designers do it. Most popular languages destroy themselves with features.

Rust is in the process of gaining every single feature anyone can imagine. Following C++ right off the complexity cliff.

Go is one of the very few languages to show incredible restraint in adding features because its designers understood the combinatorial complexity problem, among other things.

Not having unnecessary features is one of the best features of Go.

I used to have migraines and eventually had one with aura. Turns out I just needed glasses. Having an out-of-date eyeglass prescription can probably cause the same problem.

(Posting in case this helps anyone)