3 ms·

As someone new to the joys of golang, it is hard to imagine faster compile time or smaller binaries. It just keeps getting better.

• LVB 11y ago
  it is hard to imagine ... smaller binaries I like Go a lot, and I don't fret about binary size. But let's not be too charitable :). The CLI apps I write usually start trending towards 10MB with a few package imports. Their equivalents in C are usually less than 100k. One can imagine getting to better than a 100x difference.
  • giovannibajo1 11y ago
    Go binaries are static, with no external dependencies. You can't win that battle.
  • andreynering 11y ago
    > it is hard to imagine ... smaller binaries > I like Go a lot, and I don't fret about binary size. But let's not be too charitable :). The CLI apps I write usually start trending towards 10MB with a few package imports. Their equivalents in C are usually less than 100k. One can imagine getting to better than a 100x difference. Who want smaller binaries can use this compressor tool: http://upx.sourceforge.net/ http://upx.sourceforge.net/ It may be a bit slow but you just need to use it in the distributed version.
    • icebraining 11y ago
      That only saves disk space, though, not memory.
  • sfifs 11y ago
    Well.. the C binaries depend on libc on your system and come with no type safety and automatic garbage collection. Go binaries are fully static (except for networking typically and you can switch that to static as well).