I love the sleight of hand this blog post tries to pull off here. It doesn't matter than Go isn't fun to write because the AI is doing it now! Yeah so it sucked for the last twenty years? I know the main thesis is that Go is holistically good at software engineering so its weakness as a programming language is minimized. I've made a similar arguments that coding agents push the burden more into the other aspects of software engineering. But like, we all see what Google is doing here right? They want to declare that the rules have changed so Go's weakness transmutes into a strength. I'm also not buying it.

I've never found that Go is not fun to write. On the contrary... Go is pretty refreshing with its simplicity. I found myself to be immensely productive writing Go.

I agree with you here and I think you raise several good points, such as "Go's weakness transmutes into a strength" (allegedly). Indeed that makes no sense for Google to try to claim that.

Your other point is even more interesting, e. g. "before AI, Go sucked and nobody used it" - now this may be an exaggeration or simplification, but it is a great observation nonetheless, because Google suddenly tries to connect Go with the rise of AI, almost as if AI could not have risen without Go, which is indeed very strange as an argument to make by Google here. This also reminds me of Google promoting Dart/Flutter before giving up on this and preparing to send it (eventually) to the infamous Google graveyard at some point in the not-so-distant future.

It pulls no such sleight of hand, and you have invented a wholesale strawman.

It's also simply poorly informed. Go is a fantastically enjoyable language to program in. In many ways that has been a bit of its curse compared to languages like Rust (which is legitimately a not fun language to write it, and which AI tools are also very good at writing), because keeping the language simple has hobbled some edge cases.

I don't write a lot of Go as my professional life has pushed me more to Rust, but Go and Object Pascal are easily the two most enjoyable languages I've ever developed in.

On the list of languages/ecosystems that make me want to rip my hair off, Go is way below.

Javascript takes the throne on that one.

Are they wrong? If we're copy-pasting errors from applications into claude without looking at the errors (and, that is the future of generating code), why do you care about the language that's being used, outside of the LLMs being good at them?

I don't have serious metrics about if Go is better or worse than others, but LLMs seem to do fine with it.