Go is my hammer, and everything is a nail

Post by zik » Mon, Aug 12, 2024, 11:43 PM UTC

cybrexalpha wrote: post #141

acedTrex wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by no consistency in formatting? go fmt is a solid formatter that does its job

Go fmt is pretty good, but it's not ideal. My biggest gripe is imports. Go fmt will just sort imports alphabetically in lists that aren't separated by a blank line. Goimports will separate out core from 3rd party imports, unless you run it with the local flag then it'll add a third block of "local" imports. But this spread means that it's not consistent across projects which style is preferred. Some examples, based o…

Post by tialaramex » Mon, Aug 12, 2024, 11:45 PM UTC

zhengyi13 wrote: post #227

jay_kyburz wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hold on, did you just say Go doesn't have a Dictionary data type? I'm a Javascript, Lua, Python, and C# guy and Dict is my whole world.

Not a programmer, so this is every programmer's chance to hammer me on correctness. No, Go doesn't have a type named Dict, or Hash (my Perl is leaking), or whatever. It does have a map type[1], where you can define your keys as one type, and your values of another type, and that pretty closely approximates Dicts in other languages, I think. [1]: https://go.dev/blog/maps

Post by archargelod » Mon, Aug 12, 2024, 11:46 PM UTC

laserlight wrote: post #185

maccard wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The list comprehension is ever slightly more readable. I disagree - it's terse to the point of being hard to parse, particularly when you get smart ones like: [x for x in t if x not in s] > It is a bit faster to write the code for the Python variant. Code should be written to be read. Saving a few keystrokes vs time spent figuring out the `not in in not with` dance gives the the edge to Golang here. It's "high cont…

Luckily, we are writing Python, not Go, so we can use variable names with more than one letter: [word for word in sentence if word not in bannedWords] Suddenly, nothing is hard to parse.

    let a = collect:
      for word in wordList:
        if word notin bannedWords:
          word
    let b = collect(for x in list: x)

Post by valzam » Mon, Aug 12, 2024, 11:59 PM UTC

skitter wrote: post #256

maccard wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather go had real enums, and I would _prefer_ if there were sum types. I agree it's more verbose, but I don't find that that verbosity really bothers me most of the time. Is res= [x for x in foo if "banned" in x] really actually more readable than var result []string for _, x := range foo { if strings.Contains(x, "banned") { result = append(result, x) } } ? I know it's 6 lines vs 1, but in practice I look at…

I agree that list comprehensions aren't any easier to read. A proper streaming interface on the other hand lets you easily follow how the data is transformed: foo .stream() .filter(x -> x.contains("banned")) .collect(Collectors.toList()); As an aside, Go conflating lists and views irks me, in part due to what weird semantics it gives to append (e.g. if you have two disjunct slices and append an element to one slice,…

Post by cortesoft » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 12:03 AM UTC

therealdrag0 wrote: post #297

RandomThoughts3 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I love Go so much. You want to write a very clever library using elegant abstraction and generics to have a cool innovative interface to solve your problem? Tough luck, you can't. So instead, you will just have to write a bog standard implementation with for-loops and good old functions which you will have to copy and tweak as needed where you really need something more complicated. It will work perfectly…

For loops? Dang that’s some clever syntax you have there. Personally I prefer a big standard while loop. /s