Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"100% of our production system is now running Go"

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 189 posts

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#12

Post by cageface »

aaronblohowiak wrote: post #2

Creator of SASS and Haml now using Go for whole production system. When asked about surprising things about Go, its creators have said that they expected to recruit people from c++ communities, instead it seems to be more ruby/python people.

In hindsight it doesn't seem so surprising. Go really isn't a good alternative to C++ for the kinds of things that really need the low-level control and direct memory access C++ provides. And if you don't really need those things you probably should have moved on to Java or Ruby/Python/etc already.

And since a lot of Java shops are fantastically risk averse I'm not at all surprised that the same kind of people that were willing to take a risk on Python or Ruby are now into Go. It offers a lot of the expressiveness of either of the former with much better performance, concurrency as a fundamental, and the extra safety of static type checking.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#13

Post by Lewisham »

aaronblohowiak wrote: post #2

Creator of SASS and Haml now using Go for whole production system. When asked about surprising things about Go, its creators have said that they expected to recruit people from c++ communities, instead it seems to be more ruby/python people.

I think a lot of it is that people sort of did want some static type checking, but were not willing to give up on things like garbage collection or some of the other niceties that the dynamic languages provided.

As someone who has been clamoring for a statically-checked Python-esque language, Go looks awesome.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#14

Post by lambda »

spicyj wrote: post #4
siculars wrote: post #3

It's really annoying to have to log in to read something on google+, or groups for that matter. I just won't do it.

This happens only if you have some Google login cookies already -- if you delete all your Google cookies then you won't be asked to log in.

Rather than suggesting that people delete their cookies, you could suggest checking the article in private browsing mode (or whatever their browser of choice calls the feature).

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#17

Post by dkroy »

kyrra wrote: post #16
ck2 wrote: post #11

To continue shopping on m.macys.com, please enable cookies in your settings. Really? in 2012?

It's a shopping website. It's sorta hard to do cart management without cookies.

They are a good fallback, I think he is talking about using things such as Local storage, session storage, or global storage. Since the site is their mobile site I see no reason why they aren't using the new technology available to us since most mobile devices would be able to use it. DOM storage seems to be a better fit for shopping carts than cookies anyways.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#18

Post by ck2 »

kyrra wrote: post #16
ck2 wrote: post #11

To continue shopping on m.macys.com, please enable cookies in your settings. Really? in 2012?

It's a shopping website. It's sorta hard to do cart management without cookies.

You cannot even see the front page without cookies.

I suppose it's better than 1990s websites that would go into an endless loop but what about people who are just browsing?

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#19

Post by thebigshane »

cageface wrote: post #12
aaronblohowiak wrote: post #2

Creator of SASS and Haml now using Go for whole production system. When asked about surprising things about Go, its creators have said that they expected to recruit people from c++ communities, instead it seems to be more ruby/python people.

In hindsight it doesn't seem so surprising. Go really isn't a good alternative to C++ for the kinds of things that really need the low-level control and direct memory access C++ provides. And if you don't really need those things you probably should have moved on to Java or Ruby/Python/etc already. And since a lot of Java shops are fantastically risk averse I'm not at all surprised that the same kind of people that w…

Straight from Rob Pike -- http://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponentia...

  Python and Ruby programmers come to Go because they don't 
  have to surrender much expressiveness, but gain 
  performance and get to play with concurrency.

  C++ programmers don't come to Go because they have fought 
  hard to gain exquisite control of their programming 
  domain, and don't want to surrender any of it. To them, 
  software isn't just about getting the job done, it's 
  about doing it a certain way.

  The issue, then, is that Go's success would contradict 
  their world view.

  And we should have realized that from the beginning. 
  People who are excited about C++11's new features are not 
  going to care about a language that has so much less.  
  Even if, in the end, it offers so much more.
Post reply on HN