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

A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

getbruin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 310 posts

Re: A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

#2

Post by evanjrowley »

Go has govulncheck[0] for static analysis of vulnerabilities in both code and binaries. The govulncheck tool has first-class support in the Go ecosystem. No other language has this level of integration with a static analyzer and at best will only analyze for known vulnerable modules (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG).

[0] https://go.dev/doc/tutorial/govulncheck

Re: A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

#3

Post by linolevan »

evanjrowley wrote: post #2

Go has govulncheck[0] for static analysis of vulnerabilities in both code and binaries. The govulncheck tool has first-class support in the Go ecosystem. No other language has this level of integration with a static analyzer and at best will only analyze for known vulnerable modules (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG). [0] https://go.dev/doc/tutorial/govulncheck

Not understanding the difference between this and something like cargo audit[0]. I suppose it has something to do with "static analysis of vulnerabilities" but I don't see any of that from a quick google search of govulncheck.

[0]https://crates.io/crates/cargo-audit

Re: A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

#5

Post by 0x3f »

I think the more you can shift to compile time the better when it comes to agents. Go is therefore 'ok', but the type system isn't as useful as other options.

I would say Rust is quite good for just letting something churn through compiler errors until it works, and then you're unlikely to get runtime errors.

I haven't tried Haskell, but I assume that's even better.

Re: A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

#7

Post by bensyverson »

0x3f wrote: post #5

I think the more you can shift to compile time the better when it comes to agents. Go is therefore 'ok', but the type system isn't as useful as other options. I would say Rust is quite good for just letting something churn through compiler errors until it works, and then you're unlikely to get runtime errors. I haven't tried Haskell, but I assume that's even better.

I built an agent with Go for the exact reasons laid out in the article, but did consider Rust. I would prefer it to be Rust actually. But the #1 reason I chose Go is token efficiency. My intuitive sense was that the LLM would have to spent a lot of time reasoning about lifetimes, interpreting and fixing compiler warnings, etc.

Re: A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

#8

Post by sa46 »

linolevan wrote: post #3
evanjrowley wrote: post #2

Go has govulncheck[0] for static analysis of vulnerabilities in both code and binaries. The govulncheck tool has first-class support in the Go ecosystem. No other language has this level of integration with a static analyzer and at best will only analyze for known vulnerable modules (PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG). [0] https://go.dev/doc/tutorial/govulncheck

Not understanding the difference between this and something like cargo audit[0]. I suppose it has something to do with "static analysis of vulnerabilities" but I don't see any of that from a quick google search of govulncheck. [0] https://crates.io/crates/cargo-audit

govulncheck analyzes symbol usage and only warns if your code reaches the affected symbol(s).

I’m not sure about cargo audit specifically, but most other security advisories are package scoped and will warn if your code transitively references the package, regardless of which symbols your code uses.

Re: A case for Go as the best language for AI agents

#9

Post by rbtprograms »

arrow7000 wrote: post #4

> I have worked with PHP, Go, JavaScript, and Python in a professional capacity for over 10 years now. Well if it's a choice between these 4, then sure. Not sure that really suffices to qualify Go as "the" best language for agents

what would you prefer? i liked rust a lot as i found the compiler feedback loop pretty great, but the language was much more verbose and i found the simplicity of Go to be great, and the typing system is good enough for almost everything.
Post reply on HN