I'll take simple over easy every time. Simple endures. Easy is like a credit card.
Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
31–40 of 313 posts
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#32No matter what your opinion is about Go (as a language), but they nailed it for bigger projects. Go code always looks the same, performance is predictable and fast enough for most programs, and its really, really easy to be productive. When i picked up Go i basically got shit done without ever having written a single line of Go. Its statically typed (with generics yey!) and compiles very fast. Its easy to create smal…
The way I describe it is that Golang is optimized for reading, other languages are often optimized for writing. If you have to deal with someone else’s codebase, then Golang is a godsend.
I also like that you pointed out that every Golang codebase looks the same. I think part of that is that Golang’s formatter can’t be customized. I pushed for that to happen in Rust but lost the battle.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#33And Clojure has "Simple made easy" [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdOUGdseq4 -> on of Rich Hickey's best talks
I wonder why isn't Clojure more popular.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#34No matter what your opinion is about Go (as a language), but they nailed it for bigger projects. Go code always looks the same, performance is predictable and fast enough for most programs, and its really, really easy to be productive. When i picked up Go i basically got shit done without ever having written a single line of Go. Its statically typed (with generics yey!) and compiles very fast. Its easy to create smal…
As someone with the misfortune of inheriting a million plus loc Go project I disagree. Go is a nightmare from the duck typing to dependency management.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't forget the fact that it doesn't have this overbloated concept of inheritance and polymorphism of let's say Java where you have to look through 6 files to understand what's even going on. Even generics in Go were a heated debate because they make the language more complex. All in all Go was created by geniuses and it shows.
> it doesn't have this overbloated concept of inheritance and polymorphism of let's say Java where you have to look through 6 files to understand what's even going on Several Go codebases I've worked on would like a word. Some Go people really love their interfaces and abstractions and making sure every method is only 3 lines and pretty soon you're 20 files and three type hierarchies deep trying to figure out what a…
I’ve seen one Golang codebase like this and it was made by Java people
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't forget the fact that it doesn't have this overbloated concept of inheritance and polymorphism of let's say Java where you have to look through 6 files to understand what's even going on. Even generics in Go were a heated debate because they make the language more complex. All in all Go was created by geniuses and it shows.
> it doesn't have this overbloated concept of inheritance and polymorphism of let's say Java where you have to look through 6 files to understand what's even going on Several Go codebases I've worked on would like a word. Some Go people really love their interfaces and abstractions and making sure every method is only 3 lines and pretty soon you're 20 files and three type hierarchies deep trying to figure out what a…
A certain number of developers will be able to complicate any language or mechanism you provide them, it's how they feel important. I've notice the there is a group of people who has their entire identity tied up in being "smarter" than everyone else, except they aren't, so they build extremely complex systems, because they think that's what smart people do. They are interestingly often extremely well versed in their tool of choice.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#37No matter what your opinion is about Go (as a language), but they nailed it for bigger projects. Go code always looks the same, performance is predictable and fast enough for most programs, and its really, really easy to be productive. When i picked up Go i basically got shit done without ever having written a single line of Go. Its statically typed (with generics yey!) and compiles very fast. Its easy to create smal…
I used Go for many years. My issue is that it's _almost_ a great language, but in its current version it's just a collection of foot guns that makes it difficult to get shit done.
Go doesn't have some of the most library functions, so large codebases shared between teams end up with a dozen different implementations of functions like "minimum" or "filter". Good luck debugging a bug in one of the implementations.
The exception-less error handling would be great if they used sum types instead of (val, error) tuples. Return types are required to have a "default" value if you want to return an error, and good luck finding bugs where you use that value and forget the "if err != nil"`.
Worst of all, they removed most "fun" C things about pointers (like subtracting pointers in the same array) but kept the null pointers themselves. There's no way to ask for a not-null pointer at the type level, so you have to check for nullity everywhere and good luck debugging those runtime panics.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#38[deleted]
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#39No matter what your opinion is about Go (as a language), but they nailed it for bigger projects. Go code always looks the same, performance is predictable and fast enough for most programs, and its really, really easy to be productive. When i picked up Go i basically got shit done without ever having written a single line of Go. Its statically typed (with generics yey!) and compiles very fast. Its easy to create smal…
IMO, Go is a mediocre language with great tooling and a great company behind it, and it turns out ultimately if you don't have the latter, the former is irrelevant.
Yes, like Python and Javascript right? Turns out you don’t need a great language when you provide what most people want: great tooling, good resources to ramp up, great stdlib, etc. Believe it or not Golang was the first language to do this, and probably still the only one? (Rust misses the mark on great stdlib)
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#40Note that there's a Python complaint buried in there that was not a complaint about the original Python. It is a two-parter. First, package management is bad news (violating PEP 20 in that there's more than one way to do it) right now. The second is that the language has had some features and libraries deprecated and we're now on a much faster release cycle. Both are summed up in the bit "updates often lead to incompatibilities and runtime crashes."
Languages evolve, I get it. Certainly, when I first looked at Python and saw that whole integer division thing I said, "They're going to have to ditch that." Many people smarter than I have had a wide variety of opinions as to how well the unicode transition was managed. Overall, though, Python has started to feel fiddly in the way that Perl did: a lot of syntactic sugar, programmers writing "clever" code-golf you have to unpack, hunting for external libraries, and the like.