3 ms·

It's not safer than Java. The selling point over Java is developer friendliness (simpler language, tooling, dependency management, deployment, etc).

by weberc2 10y ago

tigershark 10y ago
no. I really don't like java, but you really can't tell that go has better tooling and it is more developer friendly. it's an outright lie. java tooling is very mature and has solutions that no other language that I know can use. (Spock framework above all, it is written in groovy but it is perfectly integrated in java and still I haven't find anything nearly comparable in any other language). show me some BDD framework in go, just as an example.
- vorg 10y ago
  > Spock framework above all, it is written in groovy You're the one who's telling an "outright lie" (as you put it). I just downloaded and unzipped Spock from Github, and looked through its directory structure. Virtually all of it is written in Java, not Apache Groovy. There's only a few little files written in Groovy. Perhaps you're confusing its source language with the language users of Spock write their test scripts in. In real life, Groovy is used for the JVM in the same way Bash is used for Linux, like writing glue code and build files. The statically typed stuff added in Groovy 2.x isn't used much at all, and virtually no-one would use Groovy to build actual systems. All software I know of that provides Groovy to users, like Grails, Gradle, and Spock, is itself written in Java.
wyager 10y ago
I was asking the GP why he cited safety as a feature of Go. I agree with you; that's not a good argument.
- weberc2 10y ago
  I can't speak for the GP, but my interpretation is that safety is a feature of Go, but it's not unique to Go. Go is more safe than some languages, but less safe than others.
- geodel 10y ago
  We can look at how many security updates Java release for a particular version. I see around 35 releases for Java 8 vs 6-7 release for Go during same period.
  - wyager 10y ago
    That's not what people mean when they refer to the "safety" of a language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_safety http://tobyho.com/2008/03/30/how-safe-is-your-programming/ http://tobyho.com/2008/03/30/how-safe-is-your-programming/ The fact that people consider "security releases" for compilers/runtimes to be normal and acceptable is actually extremely alarming to me, but it's different from language safety.

It's not safer than Java. The selling point over Java is developer friendliness (simpler language, tooling, dependency management, deployment, etc).

by weberc2 10y ago

It's not safer than Java. The selling point over Java is developer friendliness (simpler language, tooling, dependency management, deployment, etc).

tigershark 10y ago

no. I really don't like java, but you really can't tell that go has better tooling and it is more developer friendly. it's an outright lie. java tooling is very mature and has solutions that no other language that I know can use. (Spock framework above all, it is written in groovy but it is perfectly integrated in java and still I haven't find anything nearly comparable in any other language). show me some BDD framework in go, just as an example.

vorg 10y ago
> Spock framework above all, it is written in groovy You're the one who's telling an "outright lie" (as you put it). I just downloaded and unzipped Spock from Github, and looked through its directory structure. Virtually all of it is written in Java, not Apache Groovy. There's only a few little files written in Groovy. Perhaps you're confusing its source language with the language users of Spock write their test scripts in. In real life, Groovy is used for the JVM in the same way Bash is used for Linux, like writing glue code and build files. The statically typed stuff added in Groovy 2.x isn't used much at all, and virtually no-one would use Groovy to build actual systems. All software I know of that provides Groovy to users, like Grails, Gradle, and Spock, is itself written in Java.

wyager 10y ago

I was asking the GP why he cited safety as a feature of Go. I agree with you; that's not a good argument.

weberc2 10y ago
I can't speak for the GP, but my interpretation is that safety is a feature of Go, but it's not unique to Go. Go is more safe than some languages, but less safe than others.
geodel 10y ago
We can look at how many security updates Java release for a particular version. I see around 35 releases for Java 8 vs 6-7 release for Go during same period.
- wyager 10y ago
  That's not what people mean when they refer to the "safety" of a language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_safety http://tobyho.com/2008/03/30/how-safe-is-your-programming/ http://tobyho.com/2008/03/30/how-safe-is-your-programming/ The fact that people consider "security releases" for compilers/runtimes to be normal and acceptable is actually extremely alarming to me, but it's different from language safety.