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

Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

blog.carlsensei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 126 posts

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#2

Post by voidlogic »

"Go doesn’t suppose the use of a #! on the starting line, which means you can’t just use uncompiled files as utility scripts."

So the author wants to type "./foo.go" rather than "go run"? Why not just build your executable, "go build", then you can run/move the resulting executable ./foo.

This really doesn't seem like a big deal / why do I want to compile a utility program every-time I run it?

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#3

Post by lclarkmichalek »

I'm really not crazy about the "import github.com/foobar/foo" thing. It seems that systems like CPAN have an advantage in that a) you can roll your own mirror to avoid using an untrusted network and b) should upstream change their VCS etc, the go system requires changes to all files that import the affected module. The go system also seems to ignore the problem of versioning libraries, though I imagine there's probably some support for that in go get?

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#4

Post by Evbn »

voidlogic wrote: post #2

"Go doesn’t suppose the use of a #! on the starting line, which means you can’t just use uncompiled files as utility scripts." So the author wants to type "./foo.go" rather than "go run"? Why not just build your executable, "go build", then you can run/move the resulting executable ./foo. This really doesn't seem like a big deal / why do I want to compile a utility program every-time I run it?

Go run compiled as often each #!python. The runner can cache whatever it wants.

But someone could write shebang-go wrapper to implement this functionality, but a modification to Unix would be needed, since shebang is a magic hack on the '#' character, not configurable,IIRC

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#5

Post by orangethirty »

voidlogic wrote: post #2

"Go doesn’t suppose the use of a #! on the starting line, which means you can’t just use uncompiled files as utility scripts." So the author wants to type "./foo.go" rather than "go run"? Why not just build your executable, "go build", then you can run/move the resulting executable ./foo. This really doesn't seem like a big deal / why do I want to compile a utility program every-time I run it?

Maybe for distribution purposes?

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#7

Post by BarkMore »

lclarkmichalek wrote: post #3

I'm really not crazy about the "import github.com/foobar/foo" thing. It seems that systems like CPAN have an advantage in that a) you can roll your own mirror to avoid using an untrusted network and b) should upstream change their VCS etc, the go system requires changes to all files that import the affected module. The go system also seems to ignore the problem of versioning libraries, though I imagine there's probab…

The 'go get' sub-command is the only part of Go that interprets the import path as the location of a version control system repository. The use of the 'go get' sub-command is optional.

You can use version control commands directly to get code from your own repository mirror or to get specific versions from a repository. As long as you clone the repository to the directory in the workspace corresponding to the import path, all of the other go tools will work with the code.

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#8

Post by tptacek »

Plus side: I had no idea about "go run foo.go" and it has changed my life.

Downside: couldn't read past "And what’s up with all the languages that claim all you need are linked lists? I’m sorry, this is not 1958, and you are not John McCarthy".

Did I miss anything amazing in the rest of the article? Thanks in advance.

Re: Google Go: The Good, the Bad, and the Meh

#9

Post by DoubleCluster » 

  Let’s say I want to declare a pointer to a variable length
  array (what Python calls a list and Go calls a slice) of
  pointers to FooType objects:

     var foo *[]*FooType

  It reads very simply ...
What???? Not that it's better in other languages but this makes the article feel like satire. It reads like "The Ugly" and "The Bad".

Aside: What's with the completely defective comment syntax on HN? Can anyone give some hints on how to quote and how to escape the star character?

edit: formatting, thanks spacemanaki

Post reply on HN