Indeed a language that offer much less tools is much easier to learn, and also to master.
But from my personal experience, D is *at least* as easy to learn than Go, if not easier. Just the fact that it doesn't break much with the familiar syntax of C#, Java, C++, etc helps a lot in making the transition. And genericity and polymorphism are invaluable tools when optimizing code reuse without reducing execution speed. I know that everything can be done with interfaces, but unfortunately they run slower (according to the Golang website) than direct calls to type-specific code, and most of the time even with interface you have to manually adapt the implementation anyway. And copy/pasting then adapting manually the code is dumb and error proof. If you have always managed to avoid doing that for your Go applications, then I'm happy for you, this means you are much smarter than me. On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 1:54:45 PM UTC+1, Doğan Kurt wrote: > > But D also gives you reference classes, genericity, function polymorphism, >> conditional compilation, design by contract assertions, compile-time meta >> programming, and many other features that are severely lacking in Go. >> > > That's the biggest reason i love Go, *except maybe ken thompson :)* > > > *- A language that doesn’t have everything is actually easier to program > in than some that do. Dennis M. Ritchie* > > > *- Do Less. Enable More. Russ Cox* > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
