481–490 of 816 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this something Go intentionally didn't add?
Operator overloading essentially makes code unreadable without deep diving past the interface boundary. In Go, you can generally look at any snippet of code and know precisely what it does.
I used to work for a Go shop. We dealt with financial data. I found it so annoying that many of my colleagues would use Go for one-off tasks such as aggregating CSV files, updating the database with some data, or fetching data from the database, and then trying to make a plot. I saw my colleagues again and again implementing basic algorithms such as rolling median, or finding a maximum. Instead of loading data into P…
Production data pipelines on the other hand, but only after testing them well and as you say, making sure there's good testing if you're implementing things like numerical routines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2012: Python is Awesome! 2014: Python is a great language, but there are a few pitfalls 2016: Python is a good language with the right IDE, tooling, and process. The people are pretty cool though. 2018: I like python, but I wish more people used type annotations. 2020: You know, metaclasses are freaking awesome! They saved me so much work! 2022: Why can't people code the most obvious solution in python? 2024: Celery!…
2012: Python is Awesome! 2014: Python is a pain in the butt to manage packages and dependencies, how the hell am I gonna deploy this? It's still a mess 10 years later unless you live deep in the ecosystem and know what third-party solutions du jour to manage that complexity. At least we have Docker now. Also let's not forget the Python 3 migration fiasco that lasted ~2008-2018 and I still find myself porting librarie…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Operator overloading essentially makes code unreadable without deep diving past the interface boundary. In Go, you can generally look at any snippet of code and know precisely what it does.
Not having operator overload making the code more readable is the same argument that was brought up with generics and it is still false. Go does have operator overloading, for example + is overloaded for float.., int.. and even non numeric types like string. And it does so for a very good reason: having operator overloading makes code much more readable when used correctly. It's just that the language designers didn'…
And verbosity helps, forcing users verbosity helps the general level of quality. Programmers could overestimate themselves and think they are doing it correctly. Looking back in my code from a year ago I see things I should have done differently. I like languages that avoid me making real dumb mistakes
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2012: Python is Awesome! 2014: Python is a pain in the butt to manage packages and dependencies, how the hell am I gonna deploy this? It's still a mess 10 years later unless you live deep in the ecosystem and know what third-party solutions du jour to manage that complexity. At least we have Docker now. Also let's not forget the Python 3 migration fiasco that lasted ~2008-2018 and I still find myself porting librarie…
Dependencies is a sign of weakness.
People always under-estimate the cost of properly learning a language. At any given time I tend to have a "main go-to language". I typically spend 2-4 years getting to the point where I can say I "know" a language. Then I try to stick to it long enough for the investment to pay off. Usually 8-10 years. A surprising number of people think this is a very long time. It isn't. This is typically the time it takes to under…
I believe people over-estimate the benefit of properly learning a language. 3-12 months seems to be sufficient for the specialisation benefits to outweigh the small hit to language competency. My strategy is to be a generalist superficially learning specialized languages.
I used to work for a Go shop. We dealt with financial data. I found it so annoying that many of my colleagues would use Go for one-off tasks such as aggregating CSV files, updating the database with some data, or fetching data from the database, and then trying to make a plot. I saw my colleagues again and again implementing basic algorithms such as rolling median, or finding a maximum. Instead of loading data into P…
I've had exactly the same experience, it's a nice language but using it for things it's not suited for like data exploration makes no sense to me. Production data pipelines on the other hand, but only after testing them well and as you say, making sure there's good testing if you're implementing things like numerical routines.
People always under-estimate the cost of properly learning a language. At any given time I tend to have a "main go-to language". I typically spend 2-4 years getting to the point where I can say I "know" a language. Then I try to stick to it long enough for the investment to pay off. Usually 8-10 years. A surprising number of people think this is a very long time. It isn't. This is typically the time it takes to under…
Now, there are other languages where I'm sure that we would have had significant issues if we tried to adopt them. In particular, switching from the GC languages we were used to to a native memory language like C++ or Rust or C would have surely been a much bigger problem. The same would have probably been true if we had switched to a dynamic language.
But generally, deep language proficiency has less value in my experience than general programming proficiency, and much less than relevant domain knowledge. I would hire a complete Go novice that had programmed in Python in our specific domain over someone who has worked in Go for a decade but has only passing domain knowledge any day.
I used to work for a Go shop. We dealt with financial data. I found it so annoying that many of my colleagues would use Go for one-off tasks such as aggregating CSV files, updating the database with some data, or fetching data from the database, and then trying to make a plot. I saw my colleagues again and again implementing basic algorithms such as rolling median, or finding a maximum. Instead of loading data into P…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2012: Python is Awesome! 2014: Python is a great language, but there are a few pitfalls 2016: Python is a good language with the right IDE, tooling, and process. The people are pretty cool though. 2018: I like python, but I wish more people used type annotations. 2020: You know, metaclasses are freaking awesome! They saved me so much work! 2022: Why can't people code the most obvious solution in python? 2024: Celery!…
2012: Python is Awesome! 2014: Python is a pain in the butt to manage packages and dependencies, how the hell am I gonna deploy this? It's still a mess 10 years later unless you live deep in the ecosystem and know what third-party solutions du jour to manage that complexity. At least we have Docker now. Also let's not forget the Python 3 migration fiasco that lasted ~2008-2018 and I still find myself porting librarie…