191–200 of 449 posts
Kotlin looks nice now but on the long term it's a bad choice since they're stuck on Java 8 they will always lag behind the real JVM and won't be able to catch up since they need heavy modifications.
If you mean the java 8 bytecode version, that hasn't been true since April: https://blog.jetbrains.com/kotlin/2019/04/kotlin-1-3-30-rele...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an aside, I find English to be a beautiful language. By stealing words from so many origins (Saxon words, Latin worse and Old Norse words), there's so much versatility. The Saxon words are direct and burly. E.g. oak, brash, death, iron, etc. The Latin words are multisyllabic (e.g. multisyllabic :) ). The Norse words are just plain fun (e.g. Yule, law, heathen, oaf). It's nice to be able to choose depending on cont…
It’s a shame we stole the spelling rules from all those languages too.
So, some potential pitfalls: - The decision seems to be primarily a software architecture one, without much mention of all the other architects whose input will shape how the finished product is run and supported. In a modern software development environment, all the other parts of the org should be consulted on greenfield work to "Shift Left" anything that may need to change down the pike. Design in a silo leads to…
Ok this is going to sound ignorant, as my only experiences in backend services have been Go and Python. I don't like either. Is there something I'm missing? For simple CRUD apps, both are sufficient. But (in my limited experience), the moment I've wanted to create more complex business logic with stricter constraints, neither has been quite up to the task. Go doesn't make things easy. It asks you to repeat yourself.…
Go and Python would have to be the two easiest to use and most productive languages I've ever used. Other languages might have more powerful features but Go and Python just get more coding done more quickly and more efficiently. Other people's personal tastes may vary - and obviously do - but you can't dismiss these languages when they're so obviously very effective for many people.
Seems like such a waste. Is switching to python 3 really that hard? Is hardware that expensive? If this is indeed the right call it doesn't bode well for traditional scripting languages as the web scales to fewer high traffic apps. We might start to see more jvm, go (apparently) or even rust and c(++), rather than speed of development languages like Python or Ruby. Trend seems to be the reverse though, with python th…
I've worked with or known about too many places that have jumped on the microservices bandwagon and the only thing I've encountered is a lack of maturity (mine included) and a knee-jerk reaction against monolithic code, when the problem isn't the size of the codebase but its organic growth over time. Go is an excellent language for it but distributing your business logic and functionality over a network fundamentally…
This seems like a response to the blog post as opposed to the parent comment.
We absolutely recognize how added network boundaries changes the app in big ways.
One thing I wanted to mention: we're _not_ going the Kubernetes and service mesh sort of route because our experiences thus far show us that there's still a lot of rough edges. We're sticking with App Engine because it generally just works. Scales down essentially to zero and scales up well with the traffic. So our services are all going to individually be running on App Engine.
Plus we're not going "micro" with our services. They're each fairly decent size, own specific parts of our data, and are owned by specific teams.
Ok this is going to sound ignorant, as my only experiences in backend services have been Go and Python. I don't like either. Is there something I'm missing? For simple CRUD apps, both are sufficient. But (in my limited experience), the moment I've wanted to create more complex business logic with stricter constraints, neither has been quite up to the task. Go doesn't make things easy. It asks you to repeat yourself.…
Go seems to be optimized for onboarding new developers (particularly straight out of school) quickly, rather than for the long term comfort of developers using it. There are Rob Pike quotes that speak to the first part of that at least. If I was a business owner, I'd love Go. But what I can't really figure out is why so many devs love it. It's far from the worst thing in the world, I don't hate it, but I just can't g…
It's bit meant to be exciting, it's meant to be effective, efficient, and reliable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fundamental? IMHO, they are just syntactic sugar on a foreach loop. Which in many ways is bad because it provides yet another way to express the same concept, without a significant difference in the method of execution. What am I missing?
Map and filter allow for a very concise and clear indication of the intention of the code, so it is much quicker for the reader to parse what it is doing. Edit: Also, for loops are just a way of implementing a mapping, where you have data A that you want transformed into data A*. The map is the fundamental concept here, not the for loop.
In fact in many languages much of filter() can be implemented in the for construct rather than its body.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go seems to be optimized for onboarding new developers (particularly straight out of school) quickly, rather than for the long term comfort of developers using it. There are Rob Pike quotes that speak to the first part of that at least. If I was a business owner, I'd love Go. But what I can't really figure out is why so many devs love it. It's far from the worst thing in the world, I don't hate it, but I just can't g…
The performance of Go is not particularly impressive. Especially when it is used to write busy servers with many simultaneous requests. And as a language it is not inspiring either. Not sure why business owners should love it either. Not enough features in the language coding productivity suffer in a long run. Also if the developer needs Go because other languages are "too complex" maybe said developer can't produce…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is a niche, because most applications are IO bound and not compute bound. What even qualifies as “systems programming” is ill defined. Far more critical business systems run on Java and C# servers than C++. If there are C++ components they tend to be small parts along the critical path and not the primary implementation language.
I disagree with the notion that most applications are IO bound only. This is something people often say uncritically, but in my experience is false. Just using a non-native Electron or even Java application feels very sluggish and when you look at the Waterfall on slow web pages, what's slowing it down is very often unrelated to "I/O". Secondly, C/C++ is like the third or fourth most commonly listed programming langu…
Most software problems are not about solving them faster, it’s about combining existing components in new ways and figuring out to orchestrate it all.
I don’t care about copy elision, heap fragmentation, perfect forwarding, when my performance is being lost in the communication between services. What I need is a better architecture and more scaling, not concerning myself with if this loop is being vectorized, or that object is being moved instead of copied, and other minutia which inevitably ends up wasting your time when writing C++.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The lack of multi-line lamdas is one of my biggest gripes with python.
If you feel the need to use a multi line lambda you should be using a regular function. This is a code smell for sure.
You end up seeing functions declared within functions so that people can work around this limitation and it is grotesque.