Python vs Go Cage Match! Fight!

on March 3, 2010, 8:30 am

So this is not exactly a comparison between Python and Go. I just wanted to use my Gopher eating a Python logo image.

I love Python, it is sleeping in on Saturday mornings, my favorite book being picked up by HBO, baby holding onto pinky finger ... well, you get the idea, I like it a lot. I use it extensively for the piles and piles of code I write that never sees the light of day. Code that pre-processes files, scrapes web sites, munges together data sets, but doesn't actually end up anywhere near a user. When I saw Rob Pike talk about Go at a Sydney GTUG meeting, it occurred to me that a slick, modern, compiled language might be worth looking at for some of these behind the scenes projects that I embark upon.

Compiled vs Interpreted

Ok, duh! This is why I am here. I love Python with the heat of a thousand suns, but waiting a couple of hours for a process to finish, cools my adour a little. Compiled languages are fast and, from what I have seen, Go is a fast compiled language that also compiles fast. Fast is a feature. I have stuff to finish so I can go and watch The Sopranos.

Strong vs loose types

Occasionally, when I find myself in a particularly self deprecating frame of mind, I feel like I fit the mold of a duct tape programmer a little too much. Not in Joel Spolsky's generous, smart and get things done kind of way, but in the dumb and makes lots of mistakes kind of way. For me programming in a loosely typed language (like Python or PHP) tends to be a sequence of tiny, and sometimes humiliating, steps from a hideously broken thing to something approximating a working system. It would be nice if I could build something that was a little less flawed from the beginning. My experience is that a strongly typed language helps me do that:

// ahh ... compile error :P var testStringMap = map[string] int {8:"eight"}

Useful built-in types

When I am forced to work in languages (and to be fair, this doesn't happen very often any more) that don't have strings, maps, arrays just built-in, it causes me physical pain:

STL I used to like you because it beat writing this stuff myself but, you kinda suck.

typedef std::map StringIntegerMap; StringIntegerMap mapThatMakesMeTypeTooMuch; int theNumberEight = 8; std::string alsoTheNumberEight ("Eight"); mapThatMakesMeTypeTooMuch.insert(StringIntegerMap::value_type(theNumberEight, alsoTheNumberEight)); StringIntegerMap::const_iterator it; it = mapThatMakesMeTypeTooMuch.find (theNumberEight); if (it != mapThatMakesMeTypeTooMuch.end ()) std::string whatWasThatNumberAgain = it->second;

Python .. is awesome.

pythonDictionaryFTW = {8 : "Eight"} theNumberEight = 8 if (theNumberEight in pythonDictionaryFTW): whatWasThatNumberAgain = pythonDictionaryFTW[theNumberEight]

The map semantics in Go are just a little weird. I am sure I will get used to it. I got used to STL after all.

var testIntStringMap = map[int] string {8:"eight"} var theNumberEight int = 8 if mappedString, ok := testIntStringMap[theNumberEight]; ok { fmt.Printf ("Mapped String %s\n", mappedString) }


There are smarter, better looking programmers out there who can build awesome stuff that I want to use. I think the biggest reason not to switch from Python to Go is the range of third party libraries available for Python. Obviously this is something that will get resolved over time and I am sure there are lots of clever Google people squirreling away in their 20% time to build me awesome stuff (me personally). Beautiful Soup port for Go anyone?


I have lots more to learn about Go, but at this point I like it. It has a weird edgy feel about it that makes me feel a little smarter than I actually am, but it also reminds me a lot of Python and I luurve Python. I am hoping that I can find the time to actually build something real in the language and acquire enough knowledge to crush all resistance in the Go StackOverflow tag.

Permalink - Tags: Development,Google