Don't buy this Walmart spam.
Agreed. The bias is towards Go from the start. Additionally, the example isn't entirely trivial; it's dangerous to leave out half of the argument. The Node code could suffer from a lack of optimisation, notwithstanding the fact that the engine version isn't disclosed — and that makes a huge difference.
The notion that Node is aimed at MVPs is a hackneyed one, too. Node powers plenty of massive production sites & apps, and is omnipresent in cloud infrastructure (Lambda, Lambda@EDGE, Google Cloud Functions, Firebase etc). The point has been raised and mooted incessantly, and quoting Ryan Dahl — who resigned from the project during its infancy in 2012 — is uncontextual and misguided in equal measure.
Posts like this one hearken back to Steffen's question here: https://www.echojs.com/comment/25768/1
As they're essentially X vs JS opinion pieces on a forum specifically intended for JS.
Small mobile phone screen that displays the buttons in very close proximity due to text wrapping?
I don't know. It wasn't me. But I'm currently on a mobile ans going to try to upvote your comment. You'll see the results shortly!
For a while there, I thought threads had an approval ceiling of +100. 101! Way to go!
Expanding on your point — irrespective of whether in-place mutations eventually happen, it creates referential opacity using the imperative paradigm, which is contrary to Redux's ethos.