Coming from the other side, I agree that go is as far from classical object orientation as e.g. Javascript is. And if you bring your OOP luggage with you, you are perhaps having a hard time.
Not to forget to mention, in Go are functions first class citizens and Go has (of course) closures.
It is hard to clearly categorize Go.
But "kind of" is good enough for me as a category.
Fair enough. I mean, the official Go resource I quoted in the article also categorized it only as "kind of" so you are not far away from official Go maintainers! :)
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Coming from the other side, I agree that go is as far from classical object orientation as e.g. Javascript is. And if you bring your OOP luggage with you, you are perhaps having a hard time.
Not to forget to mention, in Go are functions first class citizens and Go has (of course) closures.
It is hard to clearly categorize Go.
But "kind of" is good enough for me as a category.
Fair enough. I mean, the official Go resource I quoted in the article also categorized it only as "kind of" so you are not far away from official Go maintainers! :)