I’m so conflicted about this comment because I have made nearly identical comments in the past.
I think I’m going to have to change my stance on this point, however. There have been so many occasions that something about Go bothered me, and I then later discovered was a prerequisite to leveraging a much simpler programming model, that I am humbled by how much more I had to learn about programming. And I have to admit that others before me said as much, but I didn’t believe them.
Sometimes one just isn’t competent to render a useful opinion.
If you haven’t seen the movie, read the book or eaten at the restaurant, the directors, authors, and chefs should rightfully ignore your criticism. And I for one am glad the Go authors ignored criticisms like mine, I am a much better programmer now then I was then because I learned something new.
Although I will admit it was difficult at times. It’s hard to go from being an expert at something to a beginner at something you feel should be essentially the same.
I feel like you're saying the criticism has to turn out right or wrong. I don't feel that's the case. A criticism is just an opinion (based on facts or not). Ignoring them will lead one way, addressing them another. Some people will like either one of them.
I think criticism from people who stopped using X is a valid opinion even if it's ignored and if other people are happy it was ignored. You can't please everyone.
What the GP was saying is that a critique from someone who actively uses something should carry more weight than a critique from someone who doesn't use something because they happen to prefer the goals of something else already available anyway.
This was also the point I was driving at. I do respect the opinions of other developers outside of the Go community as well but as you said, you cannot please everyone. When many of the loudest critics were those who seemed to miss the point of Go or at least we're disinterested in the goals of Go, it got quite irritating to constantly read how "Go is terrible" when clearly it is a perfectly decent language for a great many developers. It's the same thing with the roadmaps, those who criticised it the most were often the developers who werent Go developers and thus didn't depend on the assurances Go offers.
I wish more programmers were as thoughtful and humble as you. Sadly my personal experience is that most developers tend to be full of themselves and their opinions without even questioning them a bit.
I think I’m going to have to change my stance on this point, however. There have been so many occasions that something about Go bothered me, and I then later discovered was a prerequisite to leveraging a much simpler programming model, that I am humbled by how much more I had to learn about programming. And I have to admit that others before me said as much, but I didn’t believe them.
Sometimes one just isn’t competent to render a useful opinion.
If you haven’t seen the movie, read the book or eaten at the restaurant, the directors, authors, and chefs should rightfully ignore your criticism. And I for one am glad the Go authors ignored criticisms like mine, I am a much better programmer now then I was then because I learned something new.
Although I will admit it was difficult at times. It’s hard to go from being an expert at something to a beginner at something you feel should be essentially the same.