Earlier quoted context omitted.
Separately from that, Clojure turns some genuine Lisp people off.
That confuses me. It’s such a great lisp.
[deleted]
Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
261–270 of 313 posts
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#262The sad thing is that many people make language decisions on the beginner topics like syntax , literals, hello world or trivial samples. Sure a 20 line python app will be 40 lines in Golang, but that doesn’t mean 10k lines of python are 20k lines in golang. And there are way more serious considerations than LOC. Golang concurrency is amazing. You can reproduce an entire multi-core application stack with concurrent IO…
My experience translating a codebase from Python to Golang (chat application), is that 20k of Python really does translate to around 40k of Golang to get the same functionality. And it’s not just due to language but also expressiveness of the library ecosystem.
Are you including the libs in the calculation?
E.g. if in python you can “import map” and in golang you implement map, which one is being counted.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#263No 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…
A general "min/max" function could be implemented with Generics?
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I could not agree more with this. Go is so frustrating to me because there is so much I like but these things you listed make it miserable for me to use. A basic option and result type could fix a lot of the issues around errors and null pointers. I know languages like Scala, Haskell, and Rust have type systems that are often considered too complex but Go doesn't need all that to add these two.
Having used Ocaml for quite some time, i can understand this. However, i cant tell people (junior devs, or devs who just want to work and does not care about comp-soyery) to learn an ML (+ all the FP idioms) with a straight face.
Having a (val, err) tuple IS more easy than returning a monad.
Sometimes (most times?) pure procedural code is just the best, and i really hate languages that have feature X but does not support it fully.
As an example i would not be happy with an monadic return type if the language did not have the option to use some sort of bind/return combo, and have full pattern matching support.
Thats why i champion Go for larger teams. Almost anyone can join the team in dive in without much previous Go knowledge. This is a rare feature and i dont know many other languages that has this property.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#265No 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.
I assume your only part of a larger larger team working on this 1M LOC project? If you are alone with no previous context/knowledge the language does no really matter, you would be in a world of hurt nonetheless.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#266No 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, i can agree. Go is not my favorite language, but when it comes to pragmatism and developer productivity, Go is up there.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#267No 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…
> No matter what your opinion is about Go (as a language), but they nailed it for bigger projects. I don’t understand this template? 1. No matter your opinion on X: 2. Opinion Y is true about X! If all you have are compliments about X: just go directly to (2). You’re not making a begrudging concession, after all.
I basically mean:
No matter if you dislike Go you cant argue with the fact that it is a good fit for larger teams collaborating on a big multi-year/multi-decade project.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#268No 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…
> they nailed it for bigger projects. Yeah, indeed, big projects did not exist before!
They sure did! But in what shape do they exist in today? Depending on the language you might find N ways of doing something, where N = amount of devs who has worked on the project. Most likely you have a huge mess.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could not agree more with this. Go is so frustrating to me because there is so much I like but these things you listed make it miserable for me to use. A basic option and result type could fix a lot of the issues around errors and null pointers. I know languages like Scala, Haskell, and Rust have type systems that are often considered too complex but Go doesn't need all that to add these two.
"Defaults are useful" was IMHO the biggest mistake Go made. I understand that it made the language a lot simpler but this was a simplification that ended up moving the complexity to the user, rather than just removing it. I have seen so many bugs caused by default values, production outages. Plus the code is harder to understand because you need to consider the default value case, and make sure that it is only left a…
Not sure. If you declare a variable as of type string i think it really good that it is empty string as default. The other option is to be null.
Re: Python Is Easy. Go Is Simple. Simple != Easy
#270Python is valuable due to the ecosystem of libraries it offers. The language itself is extremely poor. I think this is not something most Python users are aware of since if you are doing ML, data-science or simple scripting there is little reason to step outside of the ecosystem. - Weird scoping rules - Very limited list-comprehensions - Ability to monkey patch things is a liability - Mutability by default - Lack of…
I could address each of these "issues" but I'd rather focus on the following: > The language itself is extremely poor > I think this is not something most Python users are aware of These two statements are contradictory. If it was indeed so "poor", people would notice :) If they instead increasingly adopt it (out of appreciation, not because they are lobbied into doing it) it becomes really difficult to logically dem…
> These two statements are contradictory. If it was indeed so "poor", people would notice :)
Would they? The history of programming is full of great ideas that took a very long time to reach mainstream adoption. We also did some things that in hindsight were bad ideas, but for a time were very popular.
This is because the programming language "market" is not rational. It moves at the speed of education, not the speed of innovation. People learn a language and they make useful things with it. Why would they stray into niche languages and PL research?