5 ms·

In case someone else is wondering: What is being called "mid-stack inlining" here is what is generally understood by the term "inlining".

CUViper 10y ago
The presentation makes a distinction between mid-stack and leaf inlining, and apparently it was only done on leaf calls before because this is less confusing in backtraces.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  throwawayish was downvoted, but I appreciated his and CUViper's clarification. It's not some weird, exotic form of inlining; it's just a more complete version than Go used to have.
- Ericson2314 10y ago
  The point is, as usual, Go is trying to catch up to what everyone else has had for years. The use of non-standard terminology here is suspicious, raising the question that the Go people are trying to hide the fact that they are playing catch-up.
  - jgalt212 10y ago
    > The point is, as usual, Go is trying to catch up to what everyone else has had for years. As far as programming languages go, Go is very new. Of course, there will be a number of areas that still need to be optimized or fully fleshed out. I think the Go compiler has only been written in Go for about a year. I'm sure you you find this pretty lame as well.
  - weberc2 10y ago
    I don't think anyone is pretending that Go is a decades-old language. What is the standard term for this kind of inlining which would distinguish it from the inlining already present in the compiler?
    - Rusky 10y ago
      The point is "inlining" already refers to this kind of inlining. The already-present form is more limited than the typical use of the term.
      - sythe2o0 10y ago
        Then what word would you have used in this presentation, given no established word existed?
        solidsnack9000 10y ago
        "Go inlining improvements..." and then "Conventionally, inlining includes ... but Go has been limited to ... until recently. With ... Go now supports inlining in a broader array of circumstances."
        overcyn 10y ago
        "Conventionally inclining includes ...?" What does it include? You've conveniently managed to skip over the crucial part with ellipses. Calls in the middle of stacks perhaps? You people have too much time on your hands to go and pick at the wording people use in their presentations.
        solidsnack9000 10y ago
        > You people have too much time on your hands to go and pick at the wording people use in their presentations. What kind of argument is that?
        overcyn 10y ago
        I'm saying that this is an incredibly inane, nitpicky, superficial conversation that has nothing to do with the technical content of the presentation.
  - infogulch 10y ago
    No hiding or sneaking is necessary to explain anything here. They needed to come up with a way to describe the difference between how it is currently implemented and how they are changing it. That's all.
  - enneff 10y ago
    Comments like these are so depressing. Someone does a bunch of work to improve the Go compiler and writes a presentation to share their approach (primarily so that other people working on Go can understand and extend it), and gives it all away for free. This is textbook open source citizenry, which should be applauded. But instead, you come along and criticize them for being too specific with their terms (!!) and also accuse them of being deceptive. This is not a marketing exercise. There is no conspiracy here.
    - vorg 10y ago
      > writes a presentation to share their approach (primarily so that other people working on Go can understand and extend it Perhaps Ericson2314's gripe is that it's being posted (and upvoted) on HN, rather than just a Go-specific forum (e.g. reddit.com/r/golang), and by implication it's intended to be read by a more general audience.
      - enneff 10y ago
        Well that's just silly. People post random stuff to HN all the time. That something is appears here does not mean that HN is the intended audience.
    - solidsnack9000 10y ago
      Nothing about giving your work away for free or wanting to do good necessarily puts one above criticism for misuse (or useless invention) of terminology. It's not a marketing exercise, you are correct -- all the more reason to expect a narrow use of terminology.
      - weberc2 10y ago
        If you're going to be pedantic, you might at least be strictly correct. There is no existing term that would distinguish it from Go's prior state, so there is no misuse nor "useless invention". Even if there were and you were correct, this would still be pedantry at its finest.
  - blackrose 10y ago
    Shitting on Go for sport: a HN pastime.
- chewxy 10y ago
  leaf calls, and calls must not be complicated (no function calls, no loops, no switches in calls). I for one am very glad that more work is put into inlining

CUViper 10y ago

The presentation makes a distinction between mid-stack and leaf inlining, and apparently it was only done on leaf calls before because this is less confusing in backtraces.

paulddraper 10y ago
throwawayish was downvoted, but I appreciated his and CUViper's clarification. It's not some weird, exotic form of inlining; it's just a more complete version than Go used to have.
Ericson2314 10y ago
The point is, as usual, Go is trying to catch up to what everyone else has had for years. The use of non-standard terminology here is suspicious, raising the question that the Go people are trying to hide the fact that they are playing catch-up.
- jgalt212 10y ago
  > The point is, as usual, Go is trying to catch up to what everyone else has had for years. As far as programming languages go, Go is very new. Of course, there will be a number of areas that still need to be optimized or fully fleshed out. I think the Go compiler has only been written in Go for about a year. I'm sure you you find this pretty lame as well.
- weberc2 10y ago
  I don't think anyone is pretending that Go is a decades-old language. What is the standard term for this kind of inlining which would distinguish it from the inlining already present in the compiler?
  - Rusky 10y ago
    The point is "inlining" already refers to this kind of inlining. The already-present form is more limited than the typical use of the term.
    - sythe2o0 10y ago
      Then what word would you have used in this presentation, given no established word existed?
      - solidsnack9000 10y ago
        "Go inlining improvements..." and then "Conventionally, inlining includes ... but Go has been limited to ... until recently. With ... Go now supports inlining in a broader array of circumstances."
        overcyn 10y ago
        "Conventionally inclining includes ...?" What does it include? You've conveniently managed to skip over the crucial part with ellipses. Calls in the middle of stacks perhaps? You people have too much time on your hands to go and pick at the wording people use in their presentations.
        solidsnack9000 10y ago
        > You people have too much time on your hands to go and pick at the wording people use in their presentations. What kind of argument is that?
        overcyn 10y ago
        I'm saying that this is an incredibly inane, nitpicky, superficial conversation that has nothing to do with the technical content of the presentation.
- infogulch 10y ago
  No hiding or sneaking is necessary to explain anything here. They needed to come up with a way to describe the difference between how it is currently implemented and how they are changing it. That's all.
- enneff 10y ago
  Comments like these are so depressing. Someone does a bunch of work to improve the Go compiler and writes a presentation to share their approach (primarily so that other people working on Go can understand and extend it), and gives it all away for free. This is textbook open source citizenry, which should be applauded. But instead, you come along and criticize them for being too specific with their terms (!!) and also accuse them of being deceptive. This is not a marketing exercise. There is no conspiracy here.
  - vorg 10y ago
    > writes a presentation to share their approach (primarily so that other people working on Go can understand and extend it Perhaps Ericson2314's gripe is that it's being posted (and upvoted) on HN, rather than just a Go-specific forum (e.g. reddit.com/r/golang), and by implication it's intended to be read by a more general audience.
    - enneff 10y ago
      Well that's just silly. People post random stuff to HN all the time. That something is appears here does not mean that HN is the intended audience.
  - solidsnack9000 10y ago
    Nothing about giving your work away for free or wanting to do good necessarily puts one above criticism for misuse (or useless invention) of terminology. It's not a marketing exercise, you are correct -- all the more reason to expect a narrow use of terminology.
    - weberc2 10y ago
      If you're going to be pedantic, you might at least be strictly correct. There is no existing term that would distinguish it from Go's prior state, so there is no misuse nor "useless invention". Even if there were and you were correct, this would still be pedantry at its finest.
- blackrose 10y ago
  Shitting on Go for sport: a HN pastime.
chewxy 10y ago
leaf calls, and calls must not be complicated (no function calls, no loops, no switches in calls). I for one am very glad that more work is put into inlining