"The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, maybe learned C or C++, probably learned Python. They’re not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to build good software. So, the language that we give them has to be easy for them to understand and easy to adopt." [1]
As a person that uses Go and is quite fond of the language, I think it's kind of a misnomer to suggest that Go projects will be sane/built well due to the language. I think that Go invested a tremendous amount of time into making their syntax simple and formattable. I don't think that at, say, 10m LoC, a Go project is any more sane or performant than other languages, I just think the syntax and style of every file is probably more consistent.
Basically I think that Go makes it easy to open and read almost any file, regardless of what you know about the rest of the project. I think that's great, but I also don't really think that it prevents you from building bad software.
> "The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of ivy league, probably learned Java, probably practiced lot of competitive programming. They’re not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to churn out some replaceable boilerplate. So, the language that we give them has to be easy for them to understand and easy to adopt."
"The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, maybe learned C or C++, probably learned Python. They’re not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to build good software. So, the language that we give them has to be easy for them to understand and easy to adopt." [1]
[1] https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2014/Fr...