A reason to choose D over Go

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 15:36:16 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 10:17:01 UTC, Bienlein wrote:
>>>I recently made a pull request for a go tool and spent about 
>>>half an
>>>hour trying to find some function to test whether an array 
>>>contains a
>>>particular element.
>>
>> There are libraries for this like gen: 
>> http://clipperhouse.github.io/gen. But it also suffers from 
>> the absence of generics.
>>
>>>trust me, from an undecided but experienced developer's
>>>perspective there are so many reasons to choose D over Go. on 
>>>the
>>>otherhand same person has a lot more reasons to choose Go over 
>>>D.
>>
>> I earn my pay with Java development. In my spare time I learn 
>> some Scala hoping there might be some work for me with Scala 
>> in the future. Then I need to become familiar with all kinds 
>> of new frameworks, tools, libraries and systems that continue 
>> to pop up every year in the JVM eco system.
>>
>> In the end there is not much time left for playing with a 
>> "systems language". As Go is very effortless it could be a 
>> good compromise here. I have thrown it away and refetched it 
>> due to lack of alternatives several times. I would like to 
>> play with D, but it has as step a learning curve as Scala. If 
>> you don't have a background in C or C++ the learning curve is 
>> even steeper. So it depends a lot from where you are coming.
>
>
> My case is the opposite - Go's easy learning curve is the exact 
> thing that drove me away from it. While Go's simplicity makes 
> it easy to learn - it also makes it uninteresting to learn. I 
> like to learn new languages that introduce interesting 
> concepts, because interesting concepts are interesting, and 
> because they can change the way you program even in languages 
> that don't support them directly. I'm currently trying to learn 
> Rust, and while it's far from trivial to wrap your mind around 
> it's concept of ownership, I feel that once I do it I can 
> emerge a better programmer - so learning Rust will benefit me 
> even if I never use Rust in actual projects.
>
> Go, on the other hand, doesn't introduce any interesting 
> concepts(more-elegant-C is far from being interesting). I don't 
> care for just learning another set of syntax and another 
> standard library - that knowledge won't have any effect on the 
> way I'm thinking. As long as I don't have a specific project I 
> need to use Go for - learning it is just a waste of time.

True. D has changed my way of thinking in other languages too. I 
sometimes find myself implementing (at least trying to) D 
concepts in other languages.

Go doesn't seem worth the trouble. Also, if it's so primitive and 
easy to learn, you don't need to bother learning it, you can just 
dip in when you need it for some reason.