- A developer with a background in Rust recently participated in development projects using Go.
- While learning Go was not difficult, the transition revealed challenges compared to Rust.
- The author notes that Go sometimes lacks the flexibility found in Rust and contains ways to make critical errors.
- After almost a year and a half of industrial development with Go, the author decided to document these specific pain points.
Quick Summary
A developer with extensive experience in Rust recently transitioned to using Go for industrial development. While the initial learning curve for Go was described as manageable, the practical application over an extended period revealed significant differences. The author identified that Go lacks flexibility in certain areas compared to Rust and presents opportunities for developers to make critical mistakes.
Following nearly 18 months of production work with Go, the author compiled a list of specific grievances. These observations are framed as a comparison for developers considering a move from Rust or similar languages. The core argument is that while Go is functional, it may not offer the same safety or expressiveness that Rust developers are accustomed to.
Transitioning from Rust to Go
The shift from Rust to Go was driven by professional requirements rather than personal preference. The author notes that prior familiarity with Go was superficial at best, with the majority of their coding career spent in Rust. Despite the lack of deep prior knowledge, the process of learning Go was not considered difficult. However, the transition became complicated once actual development work began.
Once the team started building software, unpleasant moments began to surface. The author observed that the language design choices in Go sometimes restrict the developer's ability to express complex logic the way they might in Rust. This lack of flexibility became a primary source of frustration during the development cycle.
Industrial Development Challenges
Working in a production environment highlighted the practical differences between the two languages. The author mentions that Go contains specific patterns or features that allow developers to shoot themselves in the foot. This suggests that Go offers fewer safety rails compared to Rust, which is known for its strict compile-time checks.
After spending almost a year and a half in industrial development using Go, the author felt compelled to document these issues. The goal is to provide a resource for others who might face similar hurdles when moving between these two distinct programming ecosystems.
Comparative Analysis
The comparison is explicitly framed around the author's primary language, Rust. The article serves as a critique of Go through the lens of a Rust developer. The author intends to list specific moments or features in Go that cause pain, without a strict order of severity. This approach allows for a broad overview of the language's shortcomings from a specific technical perspective.
By focusing on the lack of flexibility and the potential for errors, the article highlights the trade-offs between the two languages. It suggests that while Go may be easier to learn, it might require more vigilance to maintain the safety standards expected by developers coming from a Rust background.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the main differences between Go and Rust according to the article?
The article states that Go lacks the flexibility of Rust in some areas and contains ways to make critical errors.
How long did the author work with Go?
The author worked with Go for almost a year and a half in an industrial development setting.
