3 ms·

And Go is rather pointless to begin with. The only thing it get's right is the excellent microthreads and CSP implementation. The only reason it gained any tra

And Go is rather pointless to begin with. The only thing it get's right is the excellent microthreads and CSP implementation. The only reason it gained any traction is the big name of the mothership...

ben_jones 10y ago
It's ok to dislike the hype but it's disingenuous to say it only gets one thing right.
zzzcpan 10y ago
> The only thing it get's write is the excellent microthreads and CSP implementation. No at all. It's very far from even remotely decent implementation, the interface is too inconsistent and full of implicit behaviors and the performance is an order of magnitude slower than anything acceptable. But anyone actually using it already knows..
- the_duke 10y ago
  I admit we dropped Go before getting to production, with any kind of performance requirements. I liked the goroutine related apis though. What I remember being PAINFULLY slow is reflection. Which is very inconvenient for certain tasks (building objects from db queries, (json) serializing,...). Macros could help here, but alas, code generation is the only alternative available. Which I'm not a fan of. --- What's are your gripes with Gos CSP?
  - themihai 10y ago
    The reflection is slow indeed but most of the time you can use caching to improve it(at least that was my case). I like Go a lot but I must admit that some features would make my life easier and perhaps the language more expressive too(i.e. variant types). If that is not good enough you can use code generation(last resort)
ffggvv 10y ago
What it gets right is that it's just a tool not a play field for academics.
- the_duke 10y ago
  I admit to having a personal gripe with Go. I initially really liked it. But the languages designers just skipped over countless years of achievements in language design and implemented a C with garbage collection, with interfaces and a baked in CSP runtime. If you read a bit in the groups / release notes, they were just too lazy to implement generics. Or it was too hard. Go's ecosystem is really weak (for example, barely any library does proper versioning or any release procedure at all). I think that is at least part due to the difficulty of writing clean, generic code. And the lack of proper packaging. The lack of features is not a selling point, even if they try.
  - karma_vaccum123 10y ago
    The Go bitch threads are becoming so predictable that they can be autogenerated. Can HN implement a labor-saving device that deletes comments like this and just links to some canonical repository of gripes?
dominotw 10y ago
Easy distribution/static linking is what got me.

ben_jones 10y ago

It's ok to dislike the hype but it's disingenuous to say it only gets one thing right.

zzzcpan 10y ago

> The only thing it get's write is the excellent microthreads and CSP implementation. No at all. It's very far from even remotely decent implementation, the interface is too inconsistent and full of implicit behaviors and the performance is an order of magnitude slower than anything acceptable. But anyone actually using it already knows..

the_duke 10y ago
I admit we dropped Go before getting to production, with any kind of performance requirements. I liked the goroutine related apis though. What I remember being PAINFULLY slow is reflection. Which is very inconvenient for certain tasks (building objects from db queries, (json) serializing,...). Macros could help here, but alas, code generation is the only alternative available. Which I'm not a fan of. --- What's are your gripes with Gos CSP?
- themihai 10y ago
  The reflection is slow indeed but most of the time you can use caching to improve it(at least that was my case). I like Go a lot but I must admit that some features would make my life easier and perhaps the language more expressive too(i.e. variant types). If that is not good enough you can use code generation(last resort)

ffggvv 10y ago

What it gets right is that it's just a tool not a play field for academics.

the_duke 10y ago
I admit to having a personal gripe with Go. I initially really liked it. But the languages designers just skipped over countless years of achievements in language design and implemented a C with garbage collection, with interfaces and a baked in CSP runtime. If you read a bit in the groups / release notes, they were just too lazy to implement generics. Or it was too hard. Go's ecosystem is really weak (for example, barely any library does proper versioning or any release procedure at all). I think that is at least part due to the difficulty of writing clean, generic code. And the lack of proper packaging. The lack of features is not a selling point, even if they try.
- karma_vaccum123 10y ago
  The Go bitch threads are becoming so predictable that they can be autogenerated. Can HN implement a labor-saving device that deletes comments like this and just links to some canonical repository of gripes?

dominotw 10y ago

Easy distribution/static linking is what got me.