5 ms·

I don't see why Go deployment model is superior to C#. You can easily build native binaries in C# as well nowadays.

• abdusco 2y ago
  Smaller binary sizes for easier + cheaper distribution might be a factor.
  • gwbas1c 2y ago
    You can make very small binaries in C# if you want to. But, the team posted their rationale for Go here: https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go/discussions/411 https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go/discussions/411
• gwbas1c 2y ago
  I get the impression that, because Go has a lot of similar semantics to Typescript, it was easier to port to Go than other languages. From https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go/discussions/411 https://github.com/microsoft/typescript-go/discussions/411 > Idiomatic Go strongly resembles the existing coding patterns of the TypeScript codebase, which makes this porting effort much more tractable. > We also have an unusually large amount of graph processing, specifically traversing trees in both upward and downward walks involving polymorphic nodes. Go does an excellent job of making this ergonomic, especially in the context of needing to resemble the JavaScript version of the code. Personally, I'm a big believer in choosing the right language for the job. C# is a great language, and often is "good enough" for many jobs. (I've done it for 20 years.) That doesn't mean it's always the best choice for the job. Likewise, sometimes picking a "familiar language" for a target audience is better than picking a personal favorite.
• guappa 2y ago
  Come on… 1 statically linked executable and it can cross build incredibly easily. There's no comparison even.