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

The Reliability of Go

andrewwdeane.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 144 posts

Re: The Reliability of Go

#41

Post by tptacek »

16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

I too am upset at the prospect of annoying little text ads popping up in my source code. DOWN WITH GOLANG.

Re: The Reliability of Go

#42

Post by exch »

16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

Go is completely open source. The primary devs just happen to work at Google. That is all.

If anything, the Google name attachment may only serve to help convince management that Go is a safe, long-term bet. If you don't like the Google attachment, you are entirely free to fork the language and make it your own.

Re: The Reliability of Go

#43

Post by jackielii »

16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

Go is open source: http://golang.org/LICENSE

Re: The Reliability of Go

#44

Post by ma2rten »

16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

I don't see the big deal. What the heck are you afraid of? Is Google going to put user tracking into the Go spec? Go has two compilers, both of which are open source and open to external contributions.

Re: The Reliability of Go

#45

Post by untog »

16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

The irony of your statement is that Go is open source, and C# is an ISO standard. Those were proactive choices by the companies, and they should really be considered the leading stewards of the language- but not the owners.

Re: The Reliability of Go

#46

Post by joshbaptiste »

tptacek wrote: post #41
16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

I too am upset at the prospect of annoying little text ads popping up in my source code. DOWN WITH GOLANG.

heh.. classic response

Re: The Reliability of Go

#47

Post by Stephen_C »

j_s wrote: post #27
Stephen_C wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Andy convinced management by spending a lot of personal development time creating and testing the Go components before demonstrating in a peer review process that they were an appropriate solution. There's no special method - the introduction of Go was incremental. If I remember correctly the monitoring collection component (mentioned in the blog post) was the first. It was small, easy to swap in and easy to demonstr…

Would be interesting to hear the details on management's side of the story: 'This guy re-wrote all our stuff in the new hotness then left the company'

Well what sort of story are you expecting to hear? Without going into detail it's not really that exciting.

There was a requirement for high volume/through put messaging component in our infrastructure.

That technological requirement (along with non functional requirements e.g. development time/costs) was more than adequately met by a program(s) written by a team member written in Go. Was it an opportunity to further explore the "new hotness" that is/was Go…absolutely but the solution could have been implemented in one of the other supported technologies C/C++/Java with appropriate advantages/disadvantages associated with each. It will stay in use for as long as it provides the best solution, if that changes a more appropriate solution will be investigated.

> 'This guy re-wrote all our stuff in the new hotness then left the company'

The Go dataStore is "a" component within a large infrastructure, it is supportable by more than one member of the development team (a core requirement when deploying any new technology to production).

I'll also note that before Andy left, being a professional and thoughtful colleague, he put a lot of effort into ensuring appropriate training and knowledge was given to team members that had not been part of the deployment.

As Andy is a very well regarded former colleague, it helps that we could easily get in touch for a query, even when we're out for a beer or five* :)

(*five might not be a maximum in that scenario)

Re: The Reliability of Go

#48

Post by Stephen_C »

swah wrote: post #30
Stephen_C wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Andy convinced management by spending a lot of personal development time creating and testing the Go components before demonstrating in a peer review process that they were an appropriate solution. There's no special method - the introduction of Go was incremental. If I remember correctly the monitoring collection component (mentioned in the blog post) was the first. It was small, easy to swap in and easy to demonstr…

BTW, by component you mean program, right?

Yes, or a larger collection of programs/scripts/resources.

Re: The Reliability of Go

#49

Post by BarkMore »

reinhardt wrote: post #24

Somewhat off-topic but are there any data on the penetration of Go outside Google, a few other companies [1] and weekend hack projects on Github? Thanks to its unfortunate name, even searching for Go developer positions is challenging [2]. [1] http://go-lang.cat-v.org/organizations-using-go [2] http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=go+developer

List of organizations that use Go: https://code.google.com/p/go-wiki/wiki/GoUsers

Re: The Reliability of Go

#50

Post by coldtea »

16s wrote: post #39

I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google). All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards). It bothers me to no end to see corporations taking control of the fundamental building blocks (programming languages) of technology and then to see te…

>I'm sorry, but the world does not need another company-controlled, corporate programming language. .Net (Microsoft), Java (Oracle) and now Go (google).

The world begs to differ.

For one, Java and the JVM have a huge ecosystem, and nobody's complaining. And .NET is huge on Windows, and nobody's complaining their either. Actually, they rather like it that MS is in charge. [For the conversational english challenged, "nobody" means "a few outliers don't count"].

Oh, and Go is open source with a large community.

>All of these compilers or JIT interpreters are implemented in C or C++ (which are open languages with ISO standards).

Which is beside the point. Almost all compilers and JITs are written in C/C++. So what?

>With C and C++ and Python and Ruby and Perl we have freedom. With Go, .Net and Java, etc. we do not.

With those you have SOME freedoms. With .NET and Java you have OTHER freedoms. E.g I have the freedom to take advantage of a huge collection of libraries, with top-notch commercial support for a lot of them, and use them in around 4-5 top notch languages like Clojure, Scala, JRuby etc, with the most performant JIT in town. All the other options you mention don't give me THAT freedom.

>There is a reason go compilers are C and C++.

Portability, familiarity and low-levelness?

Also, you DO know that C (and IIRC C++) were once created and controlled by a corporation (AT & T) too, right?

Post reply on HN