3 ms·
Honest question: Isn't this approach one of the selling points of Go? The designers of the language decide what is the right way to do things, and then that's h
by bachmeier 11y ago
Honest question: Isn't this approach one of the selling points of Go? The designers of the language decide what is the right way to do things, and then that's how it's done, leading to simplicity? It's not for me, but these restrictions are often pushed as a feature (others here have explained the reasoning in this particular case).
- vortico 11y agoAn advantage of using C is its longevity. Go was designed to be a possible replacement/redesign of C (with Ken Thompson as an initial author). So this design decision doesn't make any sense, since URLs are some of the most volatile things in the programming world.
- Manishearth 11y agoI'm right now TAing a course which uses Go. Tons of people are having trouble with this, and the interaction with $GOPATH. This course has fourth year undergrads and masters' students. Most are familiar with some languages but aren't too used to production code practices (basically, one of the target audiences for Go -- be simple so that everyone can ramp up). Some have said that they preferred submodule deps or pythonesque easy-to-copy and easy-to-play-with import statements (and pip install) over this. There is the valid argument to be made that any model for publishing your package is going to be tougher than a simple github URL, but it doesn't have to be much worse. With Rust, for example, you need to run `cargo login` once (which will direct you to a page where you can make an account if you need to) to set up, and then `cargo publish`. Pretty easy to learn. I like a lot of things about Go, including it's simplicity. I wish I had more time to write Go, because it's a fun language to work with. But $GOPATH and URL-packaging are not amongst the Go features which I like.