Why Go is Not Widely Used at Google

The perception that Google heavily employs the Go programming language is far from the truth. While Go is an incredibly powerful and efficient language, its adoption at Google has been limited and strategic. This article delves into the reasons behind this phenomenon, drawing from insights into Google's engineering practices, historical context, and current challenges.

Historical Context: C, Java, and Python Dominance

Google's early days were marked by the prevalent use of programming languages such as C, Java, and Python. These languages formed the backbone of many of their critical systems, from the powerful search engine backend, Google File System (GFS), to database products like the Java-based products and the Python-powered YouTube platform. These languages were chosen due to their stability and widespread use, making them the logical choice at the time.

For instance, the GFS, a critical component that powers the Google search infrastructure, was written in C. Similarly, early Google products like YouTube, which was originally written in Python, exemplify the choice of language that balanced performance and ease of maintenance. Rewriting such long-standing systems in Go would be a monumental task, and the effort required likely outweights the benefits, given the systems' stability and wide community support. This early preference for C, Java, and Python has set a precedent that Google continues to follow.

Engineering Practices and Work Culture

Google is often perceived as a tech paradise where employees spend their days playing games and doing nothing else. However, the reality is much different. Google operates as an engineering sweatshop where the focus is on productivity and efficiency. The culture rewards high workload and long working hours, with unpaid overtime being common. Under such conditions, taking on the time and effort required to learn and integrate a new language, such as Go, becomes less attractive.

This work culture, combined with the difficulty of Go for longer codebases, might discourage the widespread use of Go at Google. Go is a language that shines in smaller, simple applications and tools, but its simplicity in the type system and lack of advanced features like generics (introduced in version 1.18) limit its suitability for large-scale projects. The type system in Go is very basic, and while Go offers concise syntax and garbage collection, it is not as powerful in complex situations as some other programming languages.

Target Audience and Learning Curve

Considering the vast pool of experienced engineers at Google, it’s feasible that Go’s extensive documentation and tutorials might not appeal to the more experienced developers. This is because experienced engineers are likely more comfortable with existing languages like C, Java, and Python, which they already master. New or less experienced developers, however, might find Go more approachable and be more willing to learn and adopt it. Go is designed to be easy to understand, with a straightforward syntax and a minimal set of features, which can make it a good choice for beginners and newcomers to the field.

Moreover, Google’s emphasis on user-friendly software engineering principles aligns well with Go's design philosophy. When the language's designer, Rob Pike, said, "They can't understand an outstanding language but at the same time we want them to create good software. That is why their language should be easy for them to understand and learn," it underscores the need for inclusivity and simplicity. For Google, ease of understanding and learning is a critical factor in language adoption, especially since the company aims to empower as many programmers as possible to contribute effectively to their projects.

Go’s Strengths and Limitations

While Go excels in specific areas, its limitations might hinder broader adoption, particularly in large-scale systems. The repetitive nature of coding in Go can be a significant disadvantage for large codebases. The lack of generics, a type system with fewer features than languages like Java or C , and its minimalistic approach to features can make it less suitable for complex, enterprise-scale applications.

That being said, Go has contributed significantly to Google's infrastructure, especially in areas like Vitess, a system designed to scale MySQL. This demonstrates that while Go might not be the go-to language for core systems, it is finding its place in supporting tools and infrastructure that enhance the efficiency and scalability of Google's services.

In conclusion, the reasons why Go is not widely used at Google are multi-faceted, ranging from historical context and engineering practices to learning curves and specific language limitations. While there is potential for Go's adoption in the right context, the current landscape at Google seems to favor the languages that have proven their worth over time: C, Java, and Python.