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

Go 1.6 is Released

blog.golang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 367 posts

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#261

Post by jug »

sinatra wrote: post #5

Go checks a lot of boxes for my ideal language for developing web services: Static type, C derived, has garbage collection, generates a single binary, supports concurrency very well, is opinionated, is small/simple, its community prefers to just use standard lib for most work, etc. Yes, Generics is an issue and so is debugging. But, overall, I can't think of many other options that check so many boxes. EDIT: I must h…

Go feels similar to where Microsoft eventually wants to be with .NET Core and their native compilation.

Other than that competitor, I don't think Go has too many others in the same niche. Maybe D? I love the combo of native code + high level language + single binary in a language that also tackles parallelism.

It's as if the Go language designers took a good hard look at Python and went "This is what's wrong with it", taking its greatest weaknesses like dependencies/packaging and the GIL, turning these around 180 degrees, instead becoming main advantages of their new language. Of course, it's not an interpreted language so the comparison isn't perfect, but Go ticks a lot of boxes for me as well that Python perhaps never will due to design.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#262

Post by kmch »

StevePerkins wrote: post #79
autoreleasepool wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like Oracle. I don't like the JVM. I refuse to learn Java because I personally have a strong bias for native, compiled code. In fact, I really dislike everything about the Java way of programming. The mental image of a huge ram sucking IDE with code completion for frameworks is simply incompatible with what I would consider the ideal creative process for me as programmer. That being said, if I were starting a…

> The mental image of a huge ram sucking IDE with code completion for frameworks is simply incompatible with > what I would consider the ideal creative process for me as programmer. Java has long been my primary professional language, and over the past few years Go has taken on a strong secondary niche at my job. I'm big fan of both, and tend to play Switzerland in arguments between them. That being said, the best Go…

VS is much faster than the JetBrains IDE without any plug ins. Adding JetBrains' products makes it slow.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#263

Post by jug »

meddlepal wrote: post #40
sinatra wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'd say modern Java is a good candidate too. However, the verbosity is a deal-killer for me. Go's error handling can be verbose, but while scanning the code, if I want/need to, I can easily skip through the error handling parts mentally. Java, though, is verbose everywhere. EDIT: Actually mtrn said it better: Java feels over-engineered.

Okay, ditch Java if it's too verbose and adopt one of Kotlin, Groovy (w/ @CompileStatic) or Scala.

I've heard complaints about Scala and binary compatibility often breaking, and it remains to be seen if Kotlin will even be successful enough to catch on.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#264

Post by tokenizerrr »

xiaoma wrote: post #135
znpy wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like people that keep saying stupid stuff like this to try and compare the size of GNU Emacs to the size of, say, NetBeans, Eclipse or Visual Studio. There is an enormous amount of stuff that "conventional" IDEs to and emacs does not do. Consider NetBeans: there are a lot of people that use the NetBeans platform to create stuff that have nothing to do with programming, the very same way emacs users create mod…

I'll set your less civil commentary to one side and simply ask this: In what programming language could Emacs possibly not be feasible option for a seasoned Emacs user?

Anything that there aren't plugins for. Same as for Netbeans, Eclipse, IntelliJ, and yes, even notepad. They're all just glorified text editors with plugin/scripting support.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#265

Post by ilek »

StevePerkins wrote: post #79
autoreleasepool wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like Oracle. I don't like the JVM. I refuse to learn Java because I personally have a strong bias for native, compiled code. In fact, I really dislike everything about the Java way of programming. The mental image of a huge ram sucking IDE with code completion for frameworks is simply incompatible with what I would consider the ideal creative process for me as programmer. That being said, if I were starting a…

> The mental image of a huge ram sucking IDE with code completion for frameworks is simply incompatible with > what I would consider the ideal creative process for me as programmer. Java has long been my primary professional language, and over the past few years Go has taken on a strong secondary niche at my job. I'm big fan of both, and tend to play Switzerland in arguments between them. That being said, the best Go…

Visual Studio is more bloated than IntelliJ or Eclipse? Absolutely not.

When I had the displeasure of using IntelliJ it would use 1.2GB RAM for a fucking 5 file project. Debugging would then use another 1GB RAM.

Visual Studio uses 1GB RAM with a 150 project solution open, and it opens said solution about as fast as IntelliJ opened that tiny project.

Adding something like Resharper (by your beloved Jetbrains) will make Visual Studio bloated and slow.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#266

Post by farawayea »

meddlepal wrote: post #8
sinatra wrote: post #5

Go checks a lot of boxes for my ideal language for developing web services: Static type, C derived, has garbage collection, generates a single binary, supports concurrency very well, is opinionated, is small/simple, its community prefers to just use standard lib for most work, etc. Yes, Generics is an issue and so is debugging. But, overall, I can't think of many other options that check so many boxes. EDIT: I must h…

Java SE and a fat jar... checks all the boxes and has generics and superior tooling. I still don't get the Go love.

Oh, wait, Java 7 is no longer the one you need, you've got to use Java 8 because nobody uses 7 now. BAM, not so easy any more.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#267

Post by coldtea »

jug wrote: post #261
sinatra wrote: post #5

Go checks a lot of boxes for my ideal language for developing web services: Static type, C derived, has garbage collection, generates a single binary, supports concurrency very well, is opinionated, is small/simple, its community prefers to just use standard lib for most work, etc. Yes, Generics is an issue and so is debugging. But, overall, I can't think of many other options that check so many boxes. EDIT: I must h…

Go feels similar to where Microsoft eventually wants to be with .NET Core and their native compilation. Other than that competitor, I don't think Go has too many others in the same niche. Maybe D? I love the combo of native code + high level language + single binary in a language that also tackles parallelism. It's as if the Go language designers took a good hard look at Python and went "This is what's wrong with it"…

>Go feels similar to where Microsoft eventually wants to be with .NET Core and their native compilation.

Only in that it will end in a native binary.

In any other sense Go is worlds behind.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#268

Post by krylon »

bmurphy1976 wrote: post #181
Myrmornis wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This type of comment is common, but specious. It sounds nice: "what works for you; great! this works for me" but it undermines a large category of important discussions: e.g. analyzing which, out of several competing discussions, is a better fit for large classes of people, or on average. In other words, I think this sort of comment strays too far in the direction of niceness, and tends to undermine simple, and desir…

> TL;DR being nice and polite is over-rated. Some things are wrong and it is helpful to say so. And thus continues the never ending cycle of "You're wrong! No you're wrong!"

The problem, I think, or at least part of the problem, is that it is hard to discuss the relative merits and problems of languages (frameworks, operating systems, ...) without feeling like somebody is trying to push his/her favorite piece of tech on somebody else.

If we discuss what e.g. Java does better than Go and vice versa for purely technical interest, there is little emotional pressure. But if I feel that somebody is trying to make me use Java (or Rust, or C++, or Visual Basic) over whatever I prefer and feel comfortable with, I get defensive. When people get defensive, they become unwilling to admit shortcoming in their preferred language/framework/OS/..., and so the debate devolves into "You're wrong! - No, you're wrong!" and namecalling.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#269

Post by bmurphy1976 »

krylon wrote: post #268
bmurphy1976 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> TL;DR being nice and polite is over-rated. Some things are wrong and it is helpful to say so. And thus continues the never ending cycle of "You're wrong! No you're wrong!"

The problem, I think, or at least part of the problem, is that it is hard to discuss the relative merits and problems of languages (frameworks, operating systems, ...) without feeling like somebody is trying to push his/her favorite piece of tech on somebody else. If we discuss what e.g. Java does better than Go and vice versa for purely technical interest, there is little emotional pressure. But if I feel that someb…

I agree 100%. Also, a lot of good devs have poured their heart and soul into golang. They are a part of this community, like it or not. They find go news interesting, but I totally feel for them that every conversation feels like somebody kicking their sandcastle down because "theirs is better.". Same goes for nodejs. Same goes for PHP. Same goes for every language actually.

A person may have the best of intentions, but they need to realize that their words can have unintended consequences. There are places times and ways to properly discuss go's shortcomings, but there are also times when it is wildly inappropriate.

This is a good event for a very hardworking and capable part of oyr community. They deserve a little respect.

Re: Go 1.6 is Released

#270

Post by masklinn »

iends wrote: post #201
zik wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nitpick - Go is very much an OO language. Almost everything is done using objects. It has a different way of handling inheritance however - it makes a different decision in the "Composition over inheritance" debate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_over_inheritance

I've found that there is no real standard definition of what OOP is and people get very angry when you say Go is OOP but it doesn't have inheritance. YMMV though.

As far as Alan Kay is concerned (always a pretty good yardstick)

> OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late binding of all things.

Post reply on HN