| Go 2017 Survey Results |
| 26 Feb 2018 |
| Tags: survey, community |
| |
| Steve Francia |
| spf@golang.org |
| |
| * Thank you |
| |
| This post summarizes the result of our 2017 user survey along with commentary |
| and insights. It also draws key comparisons between the results of the 2016 and |
| 2017 survey. |
| |
| This year we had 6,173 survey respondents, 70% more than the 3,595 we had in the |
| [[https://blog.golang.org/survey2016-results][Go 2016 User Survey]]. In |
| addition, it also had a slightly higher completion rate (84% → 87%) and a |
| higher response rate to most of the questions. We believe that survey length is |
| the main cause of this improvement as the 2017 survey was shortened in response |
| to feedback that the 2016 survey was too long. |
| |
| We are grateful to everyone who provided their feedback through the survey to |
| help shape the future of Go. |
| |
| * Programming background |
| |
| For the first time, more survey respondents say they are paid to write Go |
| than say they write it outside work. This indicates a significant shift in |
| Go's user base and in its acceptance by companies for professional software |
| development. |
| |
| The areas people who responded to the survey work in is mostly consistent with |
| last year, however, mobile and desktop applications have fallen significantly. |
| |
| Another important shift: the #1 use of Go is now writing API/RPC services (65%, |
| up 5% over 2016), taking over the top spot from writing CLI tools in Go (63%). |
| Both take full advantage of Go's distinguishing features and are key elements of |
| modern cloud computing. As more companies adopt Go, we expect these two uses |
| of Go to continue to thrive. |
| |
| Most of the metrics reaffirm things we have learned in prior years. Go |
| programmers still overwhelmingly prefer Go. As more time passes Go users are |
| deepening their experience in Go. While Go has increased its lead among Go |
| developers, the order of language rankings remains quite consistent with last |
| year. |
| |
| .html survey2017/background.html |
| |
| * Go usage |
| |
| In nearly every question around the usage and perception of Go, Go has |
| demonstrated improvement over our prior survey. Users are happier using Go, and |
| a greater percentage prefer using Go for their next project. |
| |
| When asked about the biggest challenges to their own personal use of Go, users |
| clearly conveyed that lack of dependency management and lack of generics were |
| their two biggest issues, consistent with 2016. In 2017 we laid a foundation to |
| be able to address these issues. We improved our proposal and development |
| process with the addition of |
| [[https://golang.org/wiki/ExperienceReports][Experience Reports]] which is |
| enabling the project to gather and obtain feedback critical to making these |
| significant changes. We also made |
| [[https://golang.org/doc/go1.10#build][sigificant changes]] under the hood in |
| how Go obtains, and builds packages. This is foundational work essential to |
| addressing our dependency management needs. |
| |
| These two issues will continue to be a major focus of the project through 2018. |
| |
| In this section we asked two new questions. Both center around what |
| developers are doing with Go in a more granular way than we've previously asked. |
| We hope this data will provide insights for the Go project and ecosystem. |
| |
| Since last year there has been an increase of the percentage of people who |
| identified "Go lacks critical features" as the reason they don't use Go more and |
| a decreased percentage who identified "Go not being an appropriate fit". Other |
| than these changes, the list remains consistent with last year. |
| |
| .html survey2017/usage.html |
| |
| * Development and deployment |
| |
| We asked programmers which operating systems they develop Go on; the ratios of |
| their responses remain consistent with last year. 64% of respondents say |
| they use Linux, 49% use MacOS, and 18% use Windows, with multiple choices |
| allowed. |
| |
| Continuing its explosive growth, VSCode is now the most popular editor among |
| Gophers. IntelliJ/GoLand also saw significant increase in usage. These largely |
| came at the expense of Atom and Submlime Text which saw relative usage drops. |
| This question had a 6% higher response rate from last year. |
| |
| Survey respondents demonstrated significantly higher satisfaction with Go |
| support in their editors over 2016 with the ratio of satisfied to dissatisfied |
| doubling (9:1 → 18:1). Thank you to everyone who worked on Go editor support |
| for all your hard work. |
| |
| Go deployment is roughly evenly split between privately managed servers and |
| hosted cloud servers. For Go applications, Google Cloud services saw significant |
| increase over 2016. For Non-Go applications, AWS Lambda saw the largest increase in use. |
| |
| .html survey2017/dev.html |
| |
| * Working Effectively |
| |
| We asked how strongly people agreed or disagreed with various statements about |
| Go. All questions are repeated from last year with the addition of one new |
| question which we introduced to add further clarifaction around how users are |
| able to both find and *use* Go libraries. |
| |
| All responses either indicated a small improvement or are comparable to 2016. |
| |
| As in 2016, the most commonly requested missing library for Go is one for |
| writing GUIs though the demand is not as pronounced as last year. No other |
| missing library registered a significant number of responses. |
| |
| The primary sources for finding answers to Go questions are the Go web site, |
| Stack Overflow, and reading source code directly. Stack Overflow showed a small |
| increase from usage over last year. |
| |
| The primary sources for Go news are still the Go blog, Reddit’s /r/golang and |
| Twitter; like last year, there may be some bias here since these are also how |
| the survey was announced. |
| |
| .html survey2017/effective.html |
| |
| * The Go Project |
| |
| 59% of respondents expressed interest in contributing in some way to the Go |
| community and projects, up from 55% last year. Respondents also indicated that |
| they felt much more welcome to contribute than in 2016. Unfortunately, |
| respondents indicated only a very tiny improvement in understanding how to |
| contribute. We will be actively working with the community and its leaders |
| to make this a more accessible process. |
| |
| Respondents showed an increase in agreement that they are confident in the |
| leadership of the Go project (9:1 → 11:1). They also showed a small increase in |
| agreement that the project leadership understands their needs (2.6:1 → 2.8:1) |
| and in agreement that they feel comfortable approaching project leadership with |
| questions and feedback (2.2:1 → 2.4:1). While improvements were made, this |
| continues to be an area of focus for the project and its leadership going |
| forward. We will continue to work to improve our understanding of user needs and |
| approachability. |
| |
| We tried some [[https://blog.golang.org/8years#TOC_1.3.][new ways]] to engage |
| with users in 2017 and while progress was made, we are still working on making these |
| solutions scalable for our growing community. |
| |
| .html survey2017/project.html |
| |
| * Community |
| |
| At the end of the survey, we asked some demographic questions. |
| |
| The country distribution of responses is largely similar to last year with minor |
| fluctuations. Like last year, the distribution of countries is similar to the |
| visits to golang.org, though some Asian countries remain under-represented in |
| the survey. |
| |
| Perhaps the most significant improvement over 2016 came from the question which |
| asked to what degree do respondents agreed with the statement, "I feel welcome |
| in the Go community". Last year the agreement to disagreement ratio was 15:1. In |
| 2017 this ratio nearly doubled to 25:1. |
| |
| An important part of a community is making everyone feel welcome, especially |
| people from under-represented demographics. We asked an optional question about |
| identification across a few underrepresented groups. We had a 4% increase in |
| response rate over last year. The percentage of each underrepresented group |
| increased over 2016, some quite significantly. |
| |
| Like last year, we took the results of the statement “I feel welcome in the Go |
| community” and broke them down by responses to the various underrepresented |
| categories. Like the whole, most of the respondents who identified as |
| underrepresented also felt significantly more welcome in the Go community than |
| in 2016. Respondents who identified as a woman showed the most significant |
| improvement with an increase of over 400% in the ratio of agree:disagree to this |
| statement (3:1 → 13:1). People who identified as ethnically or racially |
| underrepresented had an increase of over 250% (7:1 → 18:1). Like last year, |
| those who identified as not underrepresented still had a much higher percentage |
| of agreement to this statement than those identifying from underrepresented |
| groups. |
| |
| We are encouraged by this progress and hope that the momentum continues. |
| |
| The final question on the survey was just for fun: what’s your favorite Go |
| keyword? Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most popular response was `go`, followed by |
| `defer`, `func`, `interface`, and `select`, unchanged from last year. |
| |
| .html survey2017/community.html |
| |
| Finally, on behalf of the entire Go project, we are grateful for everyone who |
| has contributed to our project, whether by being a part of our great community, |
| by taking this survey or by taking an interest in Go. |