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

Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

fasterthanli.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 561 posts

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#301

Post by myrrlyn »

busterarm wrote: post #150
adhoc_slime wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has perhaps been my biggest pain-point with Golang.. Woe unto those who do not follow the idiosyncrasies of how golang handles versioning, package management, tooling etc. if this is really your most important part of a language I would whole-heartedly recommend looking at rust which has been a breathe of fresh air in terms of package management and tooling.

As an operations person who cares about deploying repeatable systems at scale, Rust's package management (and the toolchain's "packaging" itself) is an absolute nightmare. But at least I with MUSL can I have a 100% statically linked binary, which really should have been easier but that's another argument. Seriously though, Rust team needs to have its Come To Jesus moment about not piping shit off the internet to sh.

rustup is available in your package manager's repository

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#302

Post by samhw »

fasterthanlime wrote: post #96
zozbot234 wrote: post #2

What's up with the anti-Golang shitposts lately? I liked fasterthanlime better when he didn't just sound like a card-carrying Rust zealot. This isn't even about the practicalities of his argument really; optics matter, and it's especially bad since the Rust community used to be known for its politeness and always being fair to other language communities.

Reminder that I'm not part of /any/ Rust teams, not part of the Rust foundation, etc. etc. My site is my space, and it is specifically designed to let me post my point of view without having to bear ( ) the responsibility of speaking for entire communities at once. It's important for individuals to be able to do that, and it's on everyone else to make the distinction.

Thanks for your article. I hope you can ignore all the vitriol. It's embarrassing to see what I thought was a generally intelligent community having a collective tantrum because someone was mean about its favourite toy.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#303

Post by AnimalMuppet »

delta64 wrote: post #63
SeanLuke wrote: post #27

I don't know nothin' about Go. But this complaint really surprised me: > Go not letting you do operator overloading, harking back to the Java days where a == b isn't the same as a.equals(b) Does this guy really not understand that in a mutable language, (eq ...) is not the same as (equalp ...) and should never be confused with it? Also: operator overloading is the spawn of Satan.

The author definitely understands that. The point is: when you don't have operator overloading you get stuff like that which does demonstrably confuse many people In languages with operator overloading this just isn't a concern at all because == does the obvious thing

== should do the obvious thing. But with operator overloading, it's not clear that it does, unless you need to read the implementation of == very carefully.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#304

Post by kretaceous »

streblo wrote: post #56

I didn't care in the last post and I don't care about this one either. I care about my productivity, I care about my team's productivity, and I care about getting stuff shipped. Those are the things I care about, and go works great for that. If you care about those things too, and you're using go, you shouldn't stop using go. My whole career people have been telling me to stop using languages or tools I've been produ…

As a beginner learning Go for the past 3 weeks, thanks for the last paragraph.

I was looking into a new language to learn outside of JS and Python. I wanted to learn a hot language. I did some digging between Rust and Go and found out that Go is more suitable for web backends, CLI apps, etc. while Rust was more of a contender to C/C++, as it was primarily was made to be used as a memory-safe, correct, strict language to write low level software.

I don't generally involve myself in the latter so I chose Go. I definitely want to learn Rust someday but is it worth it if I don't get into that low level of things?

What are Go's and Rust's target applications according to readers here?

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#305

Post by busterarm »

whimsicalism wrote: post #299
busterarm wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can install a working Haskell toolchain with my package manager instead of the farcical `curl --proto '=https' --tlsv1.2 -sSf https://sh.rustup.rs | sh`. If you're an automation-oriented kind of person like it's my job to be, setting up repeatable toolchians based around the above is a total crock of shit.

If you think this is one of your stronger arguments, I think my point has been made.

Getting this right should be table stakes.

Every non-Rustacean who has suddenly had Rust forced into their workflows asks for this to be solved, specifically, and the Rust community keeps digging its heels in.

Haskell has its warts but it's not 101-level shit like this.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#306

Post by [deleted] »

dang wrote: post #284
pg_1234 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone coding in Go (and having doubts about the language) I find articles like this professionally valuable. They don't have to be correct, they just need to provoke meaningful discourse, which for me means crowdsourcing the insights of hundreds of fellow devs.

Yes. The problem here is that there was a big one of those just yesterday. HN does poorly with repetition, and throwing in the indignation aspect and the meta aspect (can you believe what an HN commenter said yesterday? the nerve!) guarantees that the thread will get high and go crazy. None of that is intentional, but it's a well-known failure mode, so the flags in this case were helpful. We've taken the [flagged] st…

[deleted]

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#307

Post by samhw »

Georgelemental wrote: post #216
collegeburner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also honestly it's very toxic to anybody right of center. It's the type that says "we're so accepting" when really they only are of certain stuff. Lots of pronoun people and making the mascot "non binary" is needlessly shoving their ideology down people's throat. Not a problem in the U.S. because it fits with the corporate woke ideology but sure as hell gonna be if they want more worldwide community. It's also way to…

As someone who both loves the Rust language and is very right of center, I've never found politics to pose much of a problem for the Rust community in practice. Yes there is occasional virtue signalling here and there but people don't let it get in the way of making programs that work.

Yeah, as someone who's gay and left-wing but equally irritated by the 'virtue signalling' stuff (my ideology is basically r/stupidpol), I don't find the Rust community too bad.

(FWIW, I appreciate your open-mindedness. I think that's the main thing I find objectionable on (parts of) both sides of the aisle: an inability to regard those who disagree as fundamentally well-intentioned human beings who happen to hold different beliefs.)

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#308

Post by ibejoeb »

masklinn wrote: post #298
ibejoeb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Portland Oregon, the capital of grunge, coffee, poor weather and whiteness it's kinda a shitpost

They're funny(ish) asides which is pretty normal for lime.

I'm not complaining. I get the joke. I'll leave this for the Seattleites to argue.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#309

Post by busterarm »

myrrlyn wrote: post #301
busterarm wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an operations person who cares about deploying repeatable systems at scale, Rust's package management (and the toolchain's "packaging" itself) is an absolute nightmare. But at least I with MUSL can I have a 100% statically linked binary, which really should have been easier but that's another argument. Seriously though, Rust team needs to have its Come To Jesus moment about not piping shit off the internet to sh.

rustup is available in your package manager's repository

No, it isn't. There is a package but it just symlinks to rustc & cargo. You still need to have run the installation manually.

And if you're still running something like CentOS 7, everyone just tells you to go download a Snap for it. eff that.

Re: Lies we tell ourselves to keep using Golang

#310

Post by bigwavedave »

Thaxll wrote: post #154

I'm just wondering why the author keeps making those articles about strongly disliking Go, ok we get it your favorite language is Rust, you don't like Go. Why does the author does not move on, exactly? "Fine. It may well be that Go is not adequate for production services unless your shop is literally made up of Go experts (Tailscale) or you have infinite money to spend on engineering costs (Google)." This is really w…

> I'm just wondering why the author keeps making those articles about strongly disliking Go, ok we get it your favorite language is Rust, you don't like Go. Why does the author does not move on, exactly?

He made a post two years ago in 2020 that was attacked by zealots yesterday when it hit the front page of hn and a post today that was a reply to that. It would be like if you were to post an opinion about perl two years ago, respond to people who attack you because they love perl more than their own children, and then be dismissively accused of crusading against perl when in reality all you did was post a response to people attacking you based on your two year old post. It's insane to say that two posts written two years apart is a crusade; I imagine most people who flagged the article and downvote its defenders simply can't accept legitimate criticisms of something they love too much to admit it has any flaws. So, I'll ask you your own question: "Why don't you move on, exactly?"

Post reply on HN