21–30 of 64 posts
I'm not a Go user, but is the important idea here that it can be run from a scriptingish environment like Jupyter or something?
It's significant syntactic sugar that brings it closer to Python, but no notebook support from what I can see. Do any notebooks support a compiled language?
IMHO these conveniences should just be in the language. List comprehensions, dictionary comprehensions, and short-hand for literals are the kind of syntactic sugar that have almost no downsides, save you some RSI, and make code more readable. I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages.
> I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages. Comprehensions become unreadable quite quickly - even simple ones have to be read inside-out, and complex (especially nested) ones are much worse. Most modern languages seem to prefer functional-style methods like `map`, `filter` etc, which are more readable in all but the simplest cases.
Except in practice, the vast majority of comprehensions are simple.
I'm not a Go user, but is the important idea here that it can be run from a scriptingish environment like Jupyter or something?
It's significant syntactic sugar that brings it closer to Python, but no notebook support from what I can see. Do any notebooks support a compiled language?
I'm not a Go user, but is the important idea here that it can be run from a scriptingish environment like Jupyter or something?
It's significant syntactic sugar that brings it closer to Python, but no notebook support from what I can see. Do any notebooks support a compiled language?
https://github.com/jupyter/jupyter/wiki/Jupyter-kernels will give you a more detailed list
IMHO these conveniences should just be in the language. List comprehensions, dictionary comprehensions, and short-hand for literals are the kind of syntactic sugar that have almost no downsides, save you some RSI, and make code more readable. I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages.
I've come to dislike list comprehensions. Simple ones are ok but they do not handle incremental complexity well. Invariably it means code slowly becomes really unreadable as time goes by because nobody wants to rewrite the list comprehension when one more little tweak stuffed in there will do the job.
I much prefer object-functional chaining style ala Scala, Groovy, Ruby etc:
some_giant_list
.findAll { it.foo > 20 }
.groupBy { it.bar }
.countBy { it.value.size() > 5 }
I'm not a Go user, but is the important idea here that it can be run from a scriptingish environment like Jupyter or something?
It's significant syntactic sugar that brings it closer to Python, but no notebook support from what I can see. Do any notebooks support a compiled language?
IMHO these conveniences should just be in the language. List comprehensions, dictionary comprehensions, and short-hand for literals are the kind of syntactic sugar that have almost no downsides, save you some RSI, and make code more readable. I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages.
> I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages. I've come to dislike list comprehensions. Simple ones are ok but they do not handle incremental complexity well. Invariably it means code slowly becomes really unreadable as time goes by because nobody wants to rewrite the list comprehension when one more little tweak stuffed in there will do the job. I much prefer object-functional…
We already have Python and Scala
I love the idea of main-less Go scripts for times where you just want to do something simple, fast. Neugram [1] aimed to make Go a better scripting tool, but unfortunately it seems the project is dead. Although Go+ says its focus is on data science, I think it could fill this niche too. By the way: does Go+ have shebang support? 1: https://github.com/neugram/ng
IMHO these conveniences should just be in the language. List comprehensions, dictionary comprehensions, and short-hand for literals are the kind of syntactic sugar that have almost no downsides, save you some RSI, and make code more readable. I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages.
> I'm surprised comprehensions in particular haven't spread to more modern languages. I've come to dislike list comprehensions. Simple ones are ok but they do not handle incremental complexity well. Invariably it means code slowly becomes really unreadable as time goes by because nobody wants to rewrite the list comprehension when one more little tweak stuffed in there will do the job. I much prefer object-functional…