Live data from Hacker News

Proposal for a Go Interpreter

docs.google.com

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: Proposal for a Go Interpreter

#11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP posted to a document that was/is modifiable by anyone who can access it - so jerks started messing with it.

Tought so, but now it says it's "too popular" and some features have been disabled, so it should be "solved" -- I definitely didn't see anything weird in the document.

Yeah, when I had replied it was unreadable as all of the text and been crossed out, random edits introduced, etc.

Re: Proposal for a Go Interpreter

#13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tought so, but now it says it's "too popular" and some features have been disabled, so it should be "solved" -- I definitely didn't see anything weird in the document.

I didn't see anything odd either.

That's good, when I saw it the whole document had been defaced.

Re: Proposal for a Go Interpreter

#14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tought so, but now it says it's "too popular" and some features have been disabled, so it should be "solved" -- I definitely didn't see anything weird in the document.

Yeah, when I had replied it was unreadable as all of the text and been crossed out, random edits introduced, etc.

If it's not 'too popular', it defaults to 'suggestions' mode, which will show all the vandalism -- switch to 'viewing' mode, and you'll only see the original doc.

Re: Proposal for a Go Interpreter

#15

Go is a great language. But why on Earth would you want to script with it?

1) play.golang.org is a popular feature of Go. Why not have better versions ? (e.g. an IPython/Jupyter kernel)

2) Golang depends on code generation for a lot of it's features. Executing generated code immediately could be helpful.

3) Very quickly execute small tests - one of my favorite python and java/eclipse features that I find somewhat lacking in Go and very much lacking in C++ development : Unit tests that execute before you've fully processed the fact that you pressed the test button in the IDE.

4) Security isolation of parts of programs would be useful

5) Same with various other isolation principles - memory usage, cpu usage, ...

6) I've always thought that Go's best feature is that it's pretty good at compiling different processes into one binary that then work pretty independently. But as I've been making bigger programs I find this less and less true.

Truth is, we need a programming language that is an operating system. Sort of like Erlang, but euhm, somewhat more usable. Go isn't that language. A language where you can start up a thread with $megabytes memory available, $cpu cpu allocation, kill if it goes over it for more than 2-3 seconds and restart after waiting 500ms. Something like that. It needs to be a language where you can really do separation-of-concerns - optimization if compiled into the same binary - minimal code changes to move a specific service to a version running on a different machine.

Re: Proposal for a Go Interpreter

#19

Why would there be "legal issues may restrict use of an interpreter in iOS applications"?

Because Go for iOS is a thing now, and iOS is the only platform currently that would prohibit the use of run-time interpreted code.

Interpreted code is now allowed on iOS. You just can't run code that has been downloaded over a network with the exception of content loaded in a UIWebView.

Re: Proposal for a Go Interpreter

#20

Why would there be "legal issues may restrict use of an interpreter in iOS applications"?

Because Go for iOS is a thing now, and iOS is the only platform currently that would prohibit the use of run-time interpreted code.

As long as the interpreter doesn't execute any prohibited system calls, the iOS store reviewers won't care and won't have a point to argue. OpenGL shaders are 'interpreted' code (though explicitly allowed). Protobuf messages can be 'interpreted' code. You probably can't get away with shipping Go code as a resource (or fetching it in cleartext over the network), but you probably should secure the input to your interpreter anyways.

There's not much difference between downloading and parsing several hundred kb of JSON and downloading and running a script. I mean, there is, but the iOS store peeps don't need to know ;)

Post reply on HN