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

Official Go support

stripe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 117 posts

Re: Official Go support

#101

Post by p0nce »

abritishguy wrote: post #83
p0nce wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go is a slower C[1] with worse syntax and oversold ideas. Stockholm syndrom is a builtin feature that comes with it and not much else. It doesn't provide basic stuff like generics, warnings, or exceptions because the authors want to make a bold statement about how they are in the Right and their potential users are wrong. Meanwhile system software will continues to be built in C and C++ since Go addressed some real p…

your entire comment is crap but the following bit definitely is: >Go isn't very successful at Google Go is used heavily for networking and server stuff at Google. The entirety of dl.google.com runs on go (ported from C).

You may not like my comment, but I don't see what is wrong in it.

Re: Official Go support

#102

Post by abritishguy »

abritishguy wrote: post #83
p0nce wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go is a slower C[1] with worse syntax and oversold ideas. Stockholm syndrom is a builtin feature that comes with it and not much else. It doesn't provide basic stuff like generics, warnings, or exceptions because the authors want to make a bold statement about how they are in the Right and their potential users are wrong. Meanwhile system software will continues to be built in C and C++ since Go addressed some real p…

your entire comment is crap but the following bit definitely is: >Go isn't very successful at Google Go is used heavily for networking and server stuff at Google. The entirety of dl.google.com runs on go (ported from C).

>Meanwhile system software will continues to be built in C and C++ since Go addressed some real problems with system programming but created new ones.

Many new system projects at Google are using Go over C and the trend is such that more and more new projects are using it.

Re: Official Go support

#103

Post by abritishguy »

pjmlp wrote: post #97
abritishguy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your entire comment is crap but the following bit definitely is: >Go isn't very successful at Google Go is used heavily for networking and server stuff at Google. The entirety of dl.google.com runs on go (ported from C).

There are currently three public projects. - dl.google.com - vitess - Google App Engine, that used to be maintained by someone on the Go team not the Google App Engine team, if the Google IO information is still valid. Chrome is focusing on Dart support and Android team was very explicit at Google IO about Java being what really matters. So any other very successful Go projects at Google that can be shared? EDIT: For…

youtube.com

Most of the places it is used are not public facing stuff they are low level network systems which is what it was designed to be good at.

Re: Official Go support

#104

Post by laumars »

fizixer wrote: post #11

Can someone explain? I'm a big fan of C and python and I've never used Go. My initial impressions from readings were that Go is a better C. But then I came across a Go person who was lamenting that misunderstanding and that Go is python but with better performance. What's it all about? Also even if we compare it to C I don't like the garbage-collection thing at system level. Also what does Go let you do in terms of g…

If I had to summarise Go; I'd say it does most things better than most languages but doesn't do anything significantly better than specific languages.

Which isn't very exciting but it is generally what people want. Something that's a good enough multi-purpose language to cover normal use cases. And in the rare examples they need something more niche, then there's other languages that will serve those functions better.

Re: Official Go support

#105

Post by xkarga00 »

pjmlp wrote: post #97
abritishguy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your entire comment is crap but the following bit definitely is: >Go isn't very successful at Google Go is used heavily for networking and server stuff at Google. The entirety of dl.google.com runs on go (ported from C).

There are currently three public projects. - dl.google.com - vitess - Google App Engine, that used to be maintained by someone on the Go team not the Google App Engine team, if the Google IO information is still valid. Chrome is focusing on Dart support and Android team was very explicit at Google IO about Java being what really matters. So any other very successful Go projects at Google that can be shared? EDIT: For…

- Kubernetes (http://venturebeat.com/2014/07/10/google-kubernetes-microsof...)

- Various projects at github.com/google

https://github.com/google/cayley

https://github.com/google/cadvisor

Re: Official Go support

#106

Post by pjmlp »

abritishguy wrote: post #103
pjmlp wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are currently three public projects. - dl.google.com - vitess - Google App Engine, that used to be maintained by someone on the Go team not the Google App Engine team, if the Google IO information is still valid. Chrome is focusing on Dart support and Android team was very explicit at Google IO about Java being what really matters. So any other very successful Go projects at Google that can be shared? EDIT: For…

youtube.com Most of the places it is used are not public facing stuff they are low level network systems which is what it was designed to be good at.

vitess is youtube. Are there others youtube related?

Re: Official Go support

#107

Post by jrobn »

rurounijones wrote: post #69
jrobn wrote: post #13

Official lua support would be peachy.

Out of curiosity: Where would this be used? The only places I ever hear the word "lua" being used are with "embedded in a game as a scripting language". Is this the case here? Does lua have a lot of use elsewhere?

Lua is compiled into OpenResty (NGINX). There is also a nice webframework called Lapis thats built on top of openresty and lua.

Re: Official Go support

#108

Post by NateDad »

fedesilva wrote: post #98
NateDad wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with "languages for those who can" is that they get relegated to pet projects, because real teams need code that everyone can understand, not just the "rock stars". I actually hope that Rust does not become that kind of a language. I think it has a lot going for it, but I do agree that it's a pretty dense language, and that will cause problems in uptake for real projects.

In my experience most people won't even learn the ins and outs of the "for those who can't" languages. Worst yet, it's not about the language: most people won't grasp more important concepts that maybe "for those who can" languages force them to know upfront. And clearly while not knowing upfront some things is easier in the short term, it is a recipe for disaster as problems get more complex. So maybe it's about pro…

People can write bad code in any language. I don't know that "forcing" people to know about it will do anything other than force people to make a possibly bad decision... such as simply marking all values as mutable.

The nice thing about go is that there's just a lot less to know. You can learn everything in a weekend. There just aren't many dark corners in the language.

Re: Official Go support

#109

Post by pcwalton »

NateDad wrote: post #88
pjmlp wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are languages for those who can and those who can't...

The problem with "languages for those who can" is that they get relegated to pet projects, because real teams need code that everyone can understand, not just the "rock stars". I actually hope that Rust does not become that kind of a language. I think it has a lot going for it, but I do agree that it's a pretty dense language, and that will cause problems in uptake for real projects.

> The problem with "languages for those who can" is that they get relegated to pet projects, because real teams need code that everyone can understand, not just the "rock stars".

> I actually hope that Rust does not become that kind of a language. I think it has a lot going for it, but I do agree that it's a pretty dense language, and that will cause problems in uptake for real projects.

Many of those real projects can't use anything easier than Rust. Sure, using a GC for everything is easier, allowing memory safety violations is easier, and allowing data races is easier (for some definition of "easy"). But for many projects, like browser engines, kernels, games, etc. neither of these are an option. In other words, avoiding new concepts comes at a price. The concepts in Rust aren't there for no reason; they're there because they're solving real problems.

(Incidentally, I don't think that "simpler" is the right term; I think there's a lot of confusion between "simple" and "easy".)

Re: Official Go support

#110

Post by pkroll »

p0nce wrote: post #79
fizixer wrote: post #11

Can someone explain? I'm a big fan of C and python and I've never used Go. My initial impressions from readings were that Go is a better C. But then I came across a Go person who was lamenting that misunderstanding and that Go is python but with better performance. What's it all about? Also even if we compare it to C I don't like the garbage-collection thing at system level. Also what does Go let you do in terms of g…

Go is a slower C[1] with worse syntax and oversold ideas. Stockholm syndrom is a builtin feature that comes with it and not much else. It doesn't provide basic stuff like generics, warnings, or exceptions because the authors want to make a bold statement about how they are in the Right and their potential users are wrong. Meanwhile system software will continues to be built in C and C++ since Go addressed some real p…

"It's Stockholm Syndrome." "It's one of the languages for those that can't."

The reason so many Go advocates seem irrationally biased is because they're under near-permanent assault. Personal assault. The anti-Go crowd never lets a Go post fly by without arguing against it, but it's the "...and everyone who is using it is stupid, ignorant, a kid, or just doesn't understand programming" that leads to the kind of defensiveness that tends to crop up. Argue against the language, but please, stop assuming people who have made different choices and have different priorities or preferences are dumb.

Post reply on HN