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

Go and Assembly

doxsey.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 127 posts

Re: Go and Assembly

#71

Post by TylerE »

jholman wrote: post #57
TylerE wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a crucial difference. Those are longer words. Many search engines either ignore, or outright throw an error on, search terms shorter than 3/4 characters.

"Many search engines"? How many search engines do you use? And which of them ignore or error on 2-letter words? I just tried this on the only four search engines I can even think of that seemed like they MIGHT matter: google, bing, ddg, and stackoverflow's site-specific. All four obviously respected the two-letter word "go" (although for my searches only Google and SO returned results I found useful).

Most message board software, for a site. Search engine doesn't just mean web search engine.

Re: Go and Assembly

#72

Post by iand »

rartichoke wrote: post #69

I only have 2 problems with Go. 1. It does have its own package manager but good luck actually finding packages. golang.org's list is out of date and so is every other resource. This is a serious problem IMO. 2. The third party web libs are pretty poor. I'm a big fan of Express for Node and prefer just a little bit of goodies ontop of something minimal. A lot of people like Sinatra/Flask so I'm not the only one who l…

Try http://godoc.org/

Because Go uses URLs for package names its easy to build tools like godoc.org that automatically aggregate packages from the web.

Re: Go and Assembly

#73

Post by rartichoke »

iand wrote: post #72
rartichoke wrote: post #69

I only have 2 problems with Go. 1. It does have its own package manager but good luck actually finding packages. golang.org's list is out of date and so is every other resource. This is a serious problem IMO. 2. The third party web libs are pretty poor. I'm a big fan of Express for Node and prefer just a little bit of goodies ontop of something minimal. A lot of people like Sinatra/Flask so I'm not the only one who l…

Try http://godoc.org/ Because Go uses URLs for package names its easy to build tools like godoc.org that automatically aggregate packages from the web.

It's a good start but it needs many more features to be considered usable. For example, I just did a search for "redis" and about 30 libs came up. Half of them don't even have a description.

How can I know which one to pick at a glance? Asking me to evaluate and profile 30 different libs for just a single task is unreasonable.

Also this page isn't even on Google's first page for when you search for something. I didn't even know it existed until you mentioned it.

Re: Go and Assembly

#74

Post by tptacek »

beagle3 wrote: post #67
tptacek wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Panic and recover are non-idiomatic; using them the way you would exceptions in Python is (stylewise, I mean) a little like using setjmp and longjmp for flow control in a C progam. In the Go standard library source code, "panic" has pretty much the role 'assert(!"error message")' has in C. The reality is that Go does not have exceptions the way Python does. If you're writing idiomatic Go, you're manually checking err…

> Panic and recover are non-idiomatic; Exactly (and probably for a reason) > In the Go standard library source code, "panic" has pretty much the role 'assert(!"error message")' has in C. Well, there's no real way to recover after such an assert (the C stdlib is undefined when you catch the SIGABRT, the stack is not guaranteed to be big enough to do anything, most I/O is not guaranteed to work, etc. -- really, very fe…

I'm not a fan of the lack of exceptions in Go, but it's not a dealbreaker for me. I feel like Go code is very cluttered and fussy. I don't love the language as a language. But as a tool for getting systems programming problems solved, it is pretty amazing, and I love working with it.

Re: Go and Assembly

#75

Post by cjh_ »

This font renders odd in IceWeasel 10.0.12 , all occurrences of the letter 'e' have their left side 'cut off' so they stand out and are very difficult to read.

Chromium Version 22.0.1229.94 Debian 7.0 (161065) works fine.

Re: Go and Assembly

#76

Post by jlgreco »

TylerE wrote: post #71
jholman wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Many search engines"? How many search engines do you use? And which of them ignore or error on 2-letter words? I just tried this on the only four search engines I can even think of that seemed like they MIGHT matter: google, bing, ddg, and stackoverflow's site-specific. All four obviously respected the two-letter word "go" (although for my searches only Google and SO returned results I found useful).

Most message board software, for a site. Search engine doesn't just mean web search engine.

I am not surprised that shitty message board search functionality was not considered when naming the language (How do you even search for "C" with such a system?)

Re: Go and Assembly

#77

Post by mseepgood »

damien wrote: post #53

So what does that middle dot actually do before the function names? It doesn't seem to be mentioned in the linked documentation of the Plan 9 assembler, and if I have to use a character that I can't easily type with my keyboard, I'd like to at least know what it actually does. :) Also, doesn't doing this limit your code to using gc toolchain (since the generic Go function has to get called from the arch-specific asm…

> So what does that middle dot actually do before the function names?

http://stackoverflow.com/a/13490787

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.go.general/78328

Re: Go and Assembly

#78

Post by csense »

This assembler is awful. I thought that AT&T had a monopoly on ghastly assembly language syntax -- but this article causes me to question that assumption:

  MOVL BX,autotmp_0000+-4(SP)    ; from the article -- terrible!
  MOV EBX,[ESP+autotmp_0000-4]   ; Intel -- comprehensible!
This assembler has an imaginary register called FP.

WTF is up with the center dot?

A programming language should not require Unicode to write -- especially assembly language!

I don't know what's worse: That this assembler exists, or that a project chose to use it after better alternatives had been created!

Re: Go and Assembly

#79

Post by jlgreco »

rartichoke wrote: post #73
iand wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try http://godoc.org/ Because Go uses URLs for package names its easy to build tools like godoc.org that automatically aggregate packages from the web.

It's a good start but it needs many more features to be considered usable. For example, I just did a search for "redis" and about 30 libs came up. Half of them don't even have a description. How can I know which one to pick at a glance? Asking me to evaluate and profile 30 different libs for just a single task is unreasonable. Also this page isn't even on Google's first page for when you search for something. I didn'…

How do you handle that with any other language? There is no shortage of redis libs for any language.

Re: Go and Assembly

#80

Post by jlgreco »

csense wrote: post #78

This assembler is awful. I thought that AT&T had a monopoly on ghastly assembly language syntax -- but this article causes me to question that assumption: MOVL BX,autotmp_0000+-4(SP) ; from the article -- terrible! MOV EBX,[ESP+autotmp_0000-4] ; Intel -- comprehensible! This assembler has an imaginary register called FP. WTF is up with the center dot? A programming language should not require Unicode to write -- espe…

How does it require unicode?
Post reply on HN