Go Lang: Comments Are Not Directives

Post by pjmlp » Mon, May 11, 2015, 1:41 PM UTC

chimeracoder wrote: post #87

marcus_holmes wrote: post #17

At last! I'm not insane! I raised this on the golang dev forums and got nowhere: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/golang-dev/r4rdPdsH1Fg/yjOOz... The response was basically "we disagree" and I wandered away feeling confused that so many bright people couldn't see the problem here.

> The response was basically "we disagree" and I wandered away feeling confused that so many bright people couldn't see the problem here. That's a rather disingenuous summary given that literally the very first response is Brad Fitzpatrick from the Go team agreeing with you, acknowledging that it's unfortunate, and admitting that it can't feasibly be changed yet due to the compatibility guarantees. And then shortly a…

Post by zaphar » Mon, May 11, 2015, 1:49 PM UTC

breakingcups wrote: post #27

The problem with Go is that, while the language and compiler are excellent, Google doesn't a lot care about tooling & ecosystem. Why? They have their own in-house tooling (which is of course both highly specific to Google's use case and closed of for the public). This in itself isn't bad, but the problem it causes is that the Googlers (who do not experience the pain that other users of the language do) are still the…

    The problem with Go is that, while the language and 
    compiler are excellent, Google doesn't a lot care about 
    tooling & ecosystem. Why? They have their own in-house 
    tooling (which is of course both highly specific to 
    Google's use case and closed of for the public).

Post by danesparza » Mon, May 11, 2015, 1:54 PM UTC

tmaly wrote: post #57

eis wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty bad. I think the reason why people are so upset/surprised is because they expect better from the Go team. Sometimes it really feels like they take the lazy route without putting enough thought and polish into things. Which is amplified by the previous statements regarding for example generics where they said they wont introduce them until they find a really good way to do it but then crank out half bake…

I have been using Perl for a long time, it did not get everything right when it first rolled out its object system. Through incremental improvements and backward compatibility the language has become very stable. Go is just getting to 1.5, so I expect it to have some issues at the beginning.

Post by Merkur » Mon, May 11, 2015, 1:59 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #90

Meh. I hear your gripe, but I think your proposed solution is not that much of an improvement. You're also basing all of this on the idea that comments are "free form". Where is that gospel? I like the idea that comments are more than just blabber. I like the idea that, when structured some way, they take on new meanings. I think this is a semantic argument.

Post by fixxer » Mon, May 11, 2015, 2:12 PM UTC

Merkur wrote: post #107

fixxer wrote: post #90

Meh. I hear your gripe, but I think your proposed solution is not that much of an improvement. You're also basing all of this on the idea that comments are "free form". Where is that gospel? I like the idea that comments are more than just blabber. I like the idea that, when structured some way, they take on new meanings. I think this is a semantic argument.

I too like the idea that comments are more than blabber. I do use comments like //BUG: //TODO: and //HOT: My argument is semantic? Yes it is! In my optinion thats the reason my argument is so strong. Please dont tell me you dont see a problem between //go: foor and //todo: bar - the first instructing some tool to change stuff in your build, the later merly mention that there is something left to do here. A directive…