41–50 of 224 posts
Their solution to the template whitespace thing underlines a fundamental difference between what the Go core developers consider to be good language/library design and what I do. To me adding the - to the template tag {{foo -}} to get rid of whitespace on that side of the tag is totally unintuitive and a really kludgy solution. Sure, it's terse and being terse can be nice, but terseness to me probably doesn't even ma…
Am I in the minority to think of Go as a completely unnecessary move-along-now-nothing-to-see-here project? (as if we didn't have enough of that already). The only niche I see for it is for those poor souls who are still wasting their time with Python/Ruby but that by itself surely can't lead to great things for the language, especially since it's riding on air. More dense air than Python but air nonetheless. Also Ro…
Their solution to the template whitespace thing underlines a fundamental difference between what the Go core developers consider to be good language/library design and what I do. To me adding the - to the template tag {{foo -}} to get rid of whitespace on that side of the tag is totally unintuitive and a really kludgy solution. Sure, it's terse and being terse can be nice, but terseness to me probably doesn't even ma…
> Sure, it's terse and being terse can be nice, but terseness to me probably doesn't even make it into my top 10 concerns when designing a language or library.
The whole point of this feature is to be terse, otherwise you could already use template comment to trim formatting whitespace.
[0] http://jinja.pocoo.org/docs/dev/templates/#whitespace-contro...
Am I in the minority to think of Go as a completely unnecessary move-along-now-nothing-to-see-here project? (as if we didn't have enough of that already). The only niche I see for it is for those poor souls who are still wasting their time with Python/Ruby but that by itself surely can't lead to great things for the language, especially since it's riding on air. More dense air than Python but air nonetheless. Also Ro…
Ignoring your broadside of insults, I keep asking myself the same thing after working with it: What is so compelling about Go? It's better than C, but we already have good choices in that area. I feel like there's a bandwagon effect around the language.
A Golang beginner's question: do these GC improvements make Golang a suitable language/ platform for writing games? EDIT: I realise this is a vague question. I suppose I was wondering if the order of magnitude GC performance in Go is likely to interfere with game loops you might find in reasonably CPU/ GPU intensive Indie games (i.e. NOT Crysis).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but at the same time, Women are tired of being treated like they're special. All of my friends who are women and engineers(or similar) would much rather be called an "engineer", not a "woman engineer". They HATE that. Treat them as equals. By giving them all these special titles and groups, the message somewhat becomes, "hey, you can't really compete with us, so we have you special groups where you can thrive an…
This is why I posed the original question. Treating somebody "differently" is discriminatory. We should deal with those that look funny at women and not treat women in a special manner.
Or I get the
"But they are intimidating and I'm scared to go."
On FF 44.0: - The header is cut off - Slide 20 gives an error when running [c: template: redefinition of template "list"] - Stable sort example does not seem to work. Gives same output as regular sort
> Most of the code examples won't run except locally and using Go 1.6.
> The playground still runs Go 1.5.
Am I in the minority to think of Go as a completely unnecessary move-along-now-nothing-to-see-here project? (as if we didn't have enough of that already). The only niche I see for it is for those poor souls who are still wasting their time with Python/Ruby but that by itself surely can't lead to great things for the language, especially since it's riding on air. More dense air than Python but air nonetheless. Also Ro…
aside: Your history is riddled with inflammatory comments... I like outside-the-box discussion. I gave you an upvote and I really like Python.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
JVM's gc is most likely significantly better. On the other hand golang's gc needs to collect less objects, in some cases orders of magnitude less. If you compare a slice of structs with 1000 elements, it'll be one object (and allocation) in golang. Equivalent array in JVM requires the array itself + 1000 Objects, 1001 allocations. In this case, golang has lot less object graph to gc. Of course slice of 1000 interface…
Could you explain what essential things JVM does better than Go at this point ? Does it stop the world less ? Or does it do more things in parallel ? Thanks
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would these GC improvements put Golang in the same league as C# (which is widely used for game development e.g. Unity3D, the .NET runtime has a GC) or can these comparisons not be made?
As heads up when talking about Unity3D, please be aware of the pre-historic .NET runtime they still are shipping versus what Xamarin and Microsoft deliver. So always take the JIT/GC complains in Unity3D context with that caveat in mind.