3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
1–10 of 249 posts
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#2Great point about time. At work we've adapted github.com/WatchBeam/clock and it's helped a lot.
Thanks for blogging about your work on juju! Despite Go already being five years old, many of the patterns around building large applications are only emerging now.
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#3What do people think about the future of Juju?
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#4What do people think about the future of Juju?
Been a few years, and it was cool in the day, but very complex. With k8 now, not sure why one would choose Juju first. They are slightly different problem domains, but not exactly.
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#5Great point about time. At work we've adapted github.com/WatchBeam/clock and it's helped a lot. Thanks for blogging about your work on juju! Despite Go already being five years old, many of the patterns around building large applications are only emerging now.
Go was released in 2007, it's 10 years old. Rust is closer to be 5yo, it's 7yo according to wikipedia.
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#6Great point about time. At work we've adapted github.com/WatchBeam/clock and it's helped a lot. Thanks for blogging about your work on juju! Despite Go already being five years old, many of the patterns around building large applications are only emerging now.
Go was released in 2007, it's 10 years old. Rust is closer to be 5yo, it's 7yo according to wikipedia.
Wasn't released to public at all until late 2009.
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#7Great point about time. At work we've adapted github.com/WatchBeam/clock and it's helped a lot. Thanks for blogging about your work on juju! Despite Go already being five years old, many of the patterns around building large applications are only emerging now.
Go was released in 2007, it's 10 years old. Rust is closer to be 5yo, it's 7yo according to wikipedia.
It only became stable in mid-2015.
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#8Great point about time. At work we've adapted github.com/WatchBeam/clock and it's helped a lot. Thanks for blogging about your work on juju! Despite Go already being five years old, many of the patterns around building large applications are only emerging now.
This is a minor nit, but it seems to me that it would have been easier to configure the unit with a shorter timeout duration rather than mocking out the time functions. Am I mistaken?
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#9I'm looking forward to my first project with GO. It appears to offer a lot with minimal complexity.
> Because Go has so little magic, I think this was easier than it would have been in other languages. You don’t have the magic that other languages have that can make seemingly simple lines of code have unexpected functionality. You never have to ask “how does this work?”, because it’s just plain old Go code.
That lack of magic and his comparison to C# sounds like a really good mix.
Re: 3.5 Years, 500k Lines of Go
#10This entire piece sounds like the Blub Paradox made real.
http://paulgraham.com/avg.html
It's written with knocking down a very specific set of straw men in mind, but rather carefully avoids coming anywhere close to addressing the legitimate criticisms of Go as a language. One of the things that's most irritating about Go enthusiasts is the way they try to close ranks on legitimate critique and reframe their language's warts as "simplicity".
Also: 20 bonus blub points for pulling the old 'I don't need generics, therefore NOBODY does' gambit.