701–710 of 816 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay so confirmed you're going meta to dodge any actual points being made, and grind any possible progress of the conversation to a halt. Bye!
Confused by academic paper writing confirmed. What lead you down that path?
You're getting way more academic with this meta waste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there is nothing to prove. Never was. What was the point of your question, if not to prove something? If you were trying to imply that the implementation doesn't exist, that implication was fatally flawed. If you were asking to waste time, then it worked. If you had another motive, what was it? Are we having a 5d chess game? I thought it was a normal conversation. > He who wrote the "citation". Nobody? Nobody wrote…
> What was the point of your question, if not to prove something? My enjoyment. For what other reason would you spend your free time doing something? > If you were trying to imply that the implementation doesn't exist, that implication was fatally flawed. And if I weren't trying? > If you were asking to waste time, then it worked. I ask nothing, but if you feel wasted your time, why? Why would you do such a thing? >…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Confused by academic paper writing confirmed. What lead you down that path?
Normal conversations have people back up their claims, dude... You're getting way more academic with this meta waste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It will work perfectly fine and end up being very readable for you and for the other persons reading your code. And make all future work both 3 times simpler, and take 3 times as long. I suppose there’s situations in which this is great, but I’m partial to requiring more. I’ll admit that hasn’t worked out very well for me unless I’m working my myself though.
I'll take verbose and simple code over terse trickery every day. People who disagree have never had to wake up at 3 in the morning to fix a critical production issue in someone else's code. And that someone else really loved "elegant and terse" code. It's not fun to grok your brain around weird language trickery when you're half-awake and in a hurry to fix stuff before the customers wake up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I used to work for a Go shop. We dealt with financial data. People dealing with finance are THE MOST risk-averse people I know. No new tool will be used without years of vetting and it'll still be blamed if something goes wrong - even if the new tool never touched that bit of the process =) Source: Consulted for a finance company and it was Ye Olde Java and COBOL all the way down =)
I'm surprised they were adventurous enough to use Java.
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…
Hah, even at Google, the Python 3 migration lasted well into 2020.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amen. I was unreasonably opposed to TypeScript at first after lots of bad experiences with messy JavaScript when I was first learning development - but after immersing myself in it for a year or so at $NEW_JOB, I absolutely love it. The only ways in which I can see that Go outperforms TypeScript is in performance, but frankly I don't care and most developers shouldn't - unless you're writing truly low-level high-perf…
I have been using typescript as my primary language for years and since I am used to it I actually enjoy it (much more than I enjoyed Java or Python in the past). And depending on what you built I agree, especially for one off scripts or if you plan on hosting just one or two things somewhere. On the other hand I recently saw a video by webdev Cody that got me thinking, where he was comparing a dead simple api server…
Although...
> writing the equivalent server in go wasn’t really all that different from the typescript code
I think _that's_ true - one strength I'll absolutely concede to Go is that spinning up a basic server is very concise with the stdlib. The problem is that implementing its _logic_ is then super-verbose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The de-facto standard of venv and pip (using a requirements.txt file) is generally painless these days. Except Python themselves now recommend the third party, pipenv. [0] Which means that there are multiple authoritative voices saying different things, and that produces confusion. [0] https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/tutorials/managing-de...
That's why I deliberately described the pip/venv solution as a "de-facto" standard. Is Python perfect in this regard? Absolutely not but the situation is FAR less painful than it was 10 years ago. The original comment claimed nothing has changed in 10 years. I used Python 10 years ago and disliked it intensely but I've recently (in the last 3 years) used it again and it is simply not true that nothing has improved in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would rather go had real enums, and I would _prefer_ if there were sum types. I agree it's more verbose, but I don't find that that verbosity really bothers me most of the time. Is res= [x for x in foo if "banned" in x] really actually more readable than var result []string for _, x := range foo { if strings.Contains(x, "banned") { result = append(result, x) } } ? I know it's 6 lines vs 1, but in practice I look at…
Filtering a container by a predicate is 50 year old technology and a very common thing. It's unbelievable that a "modern" language has no shorter or clearer idiom than that convoluted boilerplate filled Ministry of Silly Walks blob. Python had filter() and then got list comprehensions from Haskell list comprehensions. PowerShell has Where-Object taking from C# LINQ .Where() which takes from SQL's WHERE. Prolog has in…
I don't think so.
Not according to Wikipedia at least. First sentence:
>Go is a statically typed, compiled high-level programming language designed at Google[12] by Robert Griesemer, Rob Pike, and Ken Thompson.[4]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(programming_language)
Maybe you confused Brian Kernighan with Ken Thompson.
I think I have done that in the past myself. He (Ken Thompson) also worked a lot on Unix; maybe that is why the confusion.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix
Or maybe the confusion is because Kernighan was a co-author of The Go Programming Language book.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure but that's not going to work across platforms, right? So not really an apples to apples comparison.
Even the most ardent of Go-haters have to be fair and admit it makes cross-compilation really nice. GOOS=linux GOARCH=amd64 go build && scp executable user@host:direc/tory/ Out of the box, no toolchains to manage.
But honestly running poetry install for python is not bad either.