Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Ov – feature rich terminal pager

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: Show HN: Ov – feature rich terminal pager

#31

Post by thiht »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #24
unsafecast wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but why _not_ use go? You never gave a reason.

There are multiple lengthy writeups on the good and bad of Go that have made it to the HN front page multiple times over the past 5+ years. The little search bar at the bottom HN works pretty well, sometimes better than Google due to HN's habit of promoting interesting and well written blog posts, podcasts, and talks about technical subjects.

So you don’t have actual arguments?

On my end I love Go executables because I know they’re fast, self contained with very little dynamic linking or dependencies, and I know I can (and do!) contribute easily.

I try to avoid Python tools because they depend too much on the installed Python version (even with 3+ I’ve had incompatibility issues), are generally slow (I use autojump because it’s best in class IMO compared to zoxide, z, or jump, but it’s slow as a cow), and sometimes suffer from bad error handling (the few Python tools I use like awscli routinely give me Python stack traces whereas Go or Rust tools rarely, if ever, fail that badly)

Now that you have an example, what are your arguments against Go tools?

Re: Show HN: Ov – feature rich terminal pager

#32

Post by cmrdporcupine »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #15

[flagged]

Sorry, this comment is out of touch and spoiled.

I also dislike Go the language, and I tend to write new things in Rust. But that's my choice as a dev. As a consumer of stuff other people have taken their own precious time to write and let me use for free ... No, I have no business telling them their choice of tool is wrong.

Stop giving Rust a bad name.

Re: Show HN: Ov – feature rich terminal pager

#37

Post by throwawaybutwhy »

benj111 wrote: post #36
throwawaybutwhy wrote: post #33

Suppose it is a technicality, but if it can't handle large (larger than available memory, that is) files [0], it's not a pager. [0] https://github.com/noborus/ov/issues/201

It is a technicality and it is still a pager.

You are right, of course, and I stand corrected, performance and/or ability to fully replace less have no bearing on whether a program is a pager.

Re: Show HN: Ov – feature rich terminal pager

#38

Post by seanw444 »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #23
omani wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is useless bias. Get rid of it.

How is it useless bias? Go has not proven itself that it has what it takes to be a language that a developer would want to use. What problems has it solved that no other language has solved? What problems has it solved better than other languages that also solved them? The answers to those two questions have not impressed me. So, if my bias is simply using basic logic to evaluate a language, then I think I'm going to…

All of the Go projects I've used have been well-constructed and efficient. It's the language the devs chose, and it lends well to the things it's been used for. Personally, I really like the syntax. Those reasons are good enough for me.

Re: Show HN: Ov – feature rich terminal pager

#40

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

throwawaybutwhy wrote: post #37
benj111 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a technicality and it is still a pager.

You are right, of course, and I stand corrected, performance and/or ability to fully replace less have no bearing on whether a program is a pager.

Nah I still wouldn't call it a pager. They used the correct term themselves as "text viewer".
Post reply on HN