I have just embedded entire SPA dist in Go binary, much easier to deploy and reduce read from disk latency.
did you use Wails?
Thirteen Years of Go
111–120 of 217 posts
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slight counterpoint - I have written Go in the past and now am working with Kotlin and to be honest, I prefer it. I wouldn't mind Kotlin being the new Java rather than Go.
Java is the new Java :) With features like records, virtual threads, pattern matching, sealed types, string templates, and more to come, it's shaping up very nicely.
The compile times and the fact it takes 10x the memory for a lot of services is certainly something I would like to see addressed. Not to mention that Java for things like serverless has painfully slow startup times.
Java runs nice and quick when it's ready, but it's slow to get there and quite a memory hog.
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#113I've enjoyed writing Go for years. However, it's not been the language that does it for me. It's been the combination of features and ecosystem that makes it a default. It's hard to explain, but the language is one you can throw into a team of random developers and come out with benchmarks, tests, CI/CD pipelines, unified code formatting, and good parallel work models (via goroutines) almost every time. Builds are in…
I currently write a SaaS website in Go after doing quite some Rust. I do prefer Rust as a language - it's more expresive and I greatly prefer Result over error, but it has two major downsides for me compared to Go. First compilation is much slower and Go feels like a non-compiled language because of the compilation speed (my last startup I've used Scala with horrendous compilation speeds, the main reason not to use i…
Not sure if it’s an exact parallel, but you can also embed files into rust binaries with “include_bytes!” and “include_str!”.
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#114I want to love Go, due to my background in C and UNIX sysadmin, but can't. Rust does it for me though.
This is an article about Go, not an article comparing Go to Rust. I'd say the same thing if the roles were reversed: don't start language debates. They spread like kudzu and choke everything else out of the threads.
If HN adhered to this policy, it would be the most boring site on the web. Tangential, complementary and/or controversial conversation in posts is where some of the best content is.
Comment police/gatekeeping discussion (outside of dang actually enforcing the rules) is probably the most annoying behavior on this site.
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#115Go has almost everything going for it. I only wish it was a bit more C-like and you had the ability to run it without a garbage collector, and that it was more suitable for systems and embedded programming. Perhaps one day someone will come up with an implementation of Go that doesn’t use a GC. It’s just such an incredible language, and it deserves the type of Rust fanaticism that Rust has, but I suspect Go users are…
Well, I've been a huge Go fanboy telling everyone who'd listen (or not!) why it's the best thing since sliced bread. I use Go for building servers at work and have been quite happy in general except for the verbosity. I had zero plans on using Rust and was actually getting annoyed with the non-stop Rust talk everywhere, especially on HN. Then we had to urgently add Web Assembly to our frontend, and to my shock Go was generating gigantic WASM files, so I ended up trying Rust, being forced really. But once I experienced Rust, I've become a convert singing a completely different tune. So those of you also annoyed by all these "fanatical" Rustaceans telling you how wonderful it is, please try Rust (for a real project) before passing judgment.
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
> > it's Bell Labs heritage > I have never met a person (in person, offline) who has cared about this at all. People care about it because the language has the Bell Labs "feel". They don't care about it the way a dog breeder would care about a dog's ancestry. (And of those who care about the "feel", some view it as a positive, others as a negative...)
> People care about it because the language has the Bell Labs "feel" I'm not attacking, I am honestly asking: What does that mean? That it feels C-like? Or something different? A lot of languages are C-like in syntax, so Go is not exactly unique in that aspect.
The belief that you can always improve some code by making it do less.
Contrast with e.g. Haskell which is based on the belief you can always improve some code by making it more general, or Rust on the belief you can improve it by making it safer, or Java that you can improve it by breaking it down into smaller chunks.
Languages carry aesthetic values. Most are aren't committed to them above literally all else - we all want our code to be somewhat simple and general and safe and isolated etc - but other than the most kitchen sink-y of them (C++, JavaScript) they have priorities among those which show through. (And even in those you can find some, muddled as they are.)
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment has been good at generating some discussion around what makes Go special. Since the sibling comments already addressed everything else, I'll talk about this one: > For a compiled language it's not very fast This is essentially true, _but_ a lot of Go users are coming from Python, JavaScript, and maybe Ruby and Go is much faster. Additionally, it comes _close enough_ to Java while typically having a much…
I never got the feeling it was slower than Java, but I've only used the standard JVM. In benchmarks, they don't really differ. But the memory footprint is amazing. I've got three servers plus up to 10 test environments running on one small VPS (Virtual Private Server), and everything runs as smooth as can be; memory usage stays below 1GB, leaving enough space for the db server. In a previous job, we had a Java/Tomcat…
I was trying to be charitable given that I haven't seriously used Java in quite a while and have seen some indications that the JVM can be speedier (it _has_ had an incredible amount of optimization work done on it).
But, yeah, my experience with Go matches yours. It's really amazingly light on resource usage.
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#118I've enjoyed writing Go for years. However, it's not been the language that does it for me. It's been the combination of features and ecosystem that makes it a default. It's hard to explain, but the language is one you can throw into a team of random developers and come out with benchmarks, tests, CI/CD pipelines, unified code formatting, and good parallel work models (via goroutines) almost every time. Builds are in…
Slight counterpoint - I have written Go in the past and now am working with Kotlin and to be honest, I prefer it. I wouldn't mind Kotlin being the new Java rather than Go.
I prefer Kotlin as well. Its much more readable for expressing business problems.
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slight counterpoint - I have written Go in the past and now am working with Kotlin and to be honest, I prefer it. I wouldn't mind Kotlin being the new Java rather than Go.
Java is the new Java :) With features like records, virtual threads, pattern matching, sealed types, string templates, and more to come, it's shaping up very nicely.
I tried the latest version of Java. Unfortunately, it still feels very clunky. They need to add the ability specify functions directly instead of as classes. ex: BiConsumer
Re: Thirteen Years of Go
#120Interesting to see many comments regarding "Go is my favourite programming tool, but not my favourite programming language". I totally agree. I love the tooling (go build, go fmt, etc.), the performance, the ecosystem... but the language itself is not the best out there. I would love a mix between Python and Go: Python as the language with Go's tooling. That would be amazing!