Go is a good fit for agents
docs.hatchet.run
Go is a good fit for agents
1–10 of 183 posts
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#2> concurrency
by that logic Elixir is even better for agents.
also the link at the bottom of the page is pretty much why I ditched Go: https://go.dev/blog/error-syntax
The AI landscape moves so fast, and this conservative, backwards looking mindset of the new Go dev team doesn't match the forward looking LLM engineering mindset.
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#3> concurrency by that logic Elixir is even better for agents. also the link at the bottom of the page is pretty much why I ditched Go: https://go.dev/blog/error-syntax The AI landscape moves so fast, and this conservative, backwards looking mindset of the new Go dev team doesn't match the forward looking LLM engineering mindset.
I don't use either Go or LLMs, but isn't the point of LLMs that they write the tedious boilerplate for you? What's the value in a small syntactic improvement if the computer is generating it all anyway?
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#4As a functionally-code-illiterate-vibe-coder, I can confirm that LLMs are good at writing Go code.
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#5> concurrency by that logic Elixir is even better for agents. also the link at the bottom of the page is pretty much why I ditched Go: https://go.dev/blog/error-syntax The AI landscape moves so fast, and this conservative, backwards looking mindset of the new Go dev team doesn't match the forward looking LLM engineering mindset.
[dead]
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#6> concurrency by that logic Elixir is even better for agents. also the link at the bottom of the page is pretty much why I ditched Go: https://go.dev/blog/error-syntax The AI landscape moves so fast, and this conservative, backwards looking mindset of the new Go dev team doesn't match the forward looking LLM engineering mindset.
by your logic, only considering part of the argument is as good as considering the entire argument.
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#7> concurrency by that logic Elixir is even better for agents. also the link at the bottom of the page is pretty much why I ditched Go: https://go.dev/blog/error-syntax The AI landscape moves so fast, and this conservative, backwards looking mindset of the new Go dev team doesn't match the forward looking LLM engineering mindset.
I don't use either Go or LLMs, but isn't the point of LLMs that they write the tedious boilerplate for you? What's the value in a small syntactic improvement if the computer is generating it all anyway?
Elixir's concurrency model is fundamentally different than Go's; it's not just syntax difference.
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#8AI engineers will literally invent a new universe before they touch JavaScript.
The death knell for variety in AI languages was when Google rug-pulled TensorFlow for Swift.
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#9> concurrency by that logic Elixir is even better for agents. also the link at the bottom of the page is pretty much why I ditched Go: https://go.dev/blog/error-syntax The AI landscape moves so fast, and this conservative, backwards looking mindset of the new Go dev team doesn't match the forward looking LLM engineering mindset.
Well elixir doesn't produce goroutines (managed threads), they produce "lightweight processes" which have isolated memory. These are more expensive to grow and aren't as easy to share data between one another, although they're much more fault tolerant as a result. It could be better however the underlying concurrency model in Elixir is relatively unique
Re: Go is a good fit for agents
#10I wish we had better concurrency models in the ML world. I tried doing some ML in Go a few months back and it's basically impossible; there's just no library support and doing anything requires a gRPC call or a wrapper. Python has limitations and C++ has a tendency to make everything too verbose.