5 ms·

This is a huge complaint of those new to Go and touted as a benefit from those who still use it. Being explicit is a double edge sword. It requires more typing

This is a huge complaint of those new to Go and touted as a benefit from those who still use it. Being explicit is a double edge sword. It requires more typing, but there's also no don't about what the code is doing.

gregwebs 8y ago
The question mark in Rust is equally explicit in the case where it can be used to simply pass the error along.
- steveklabnik 8y ago
  And in cases where you don’t, various combinators let you handle common patterns more easily too. You can also write it Go style if you prefer; we started off with exactly that, then moved to a macro, then turned that macro into ?. That all being said, none of that feels very Go-like, so it makes sense that they haven’t followed what we did.
  - everdev 8y ago
    I personally prefer the more concise version :)
  - vram22 8y ago
    >You can also write it Go style if you prefer; we started off with exactly that, then moved to a macro, then turned that macro into ?. Interesting. Does the Rust book (you wrote), explain the difference between the Go style and the current Rust style, and explain how to use the Rust style (well)? Asking because I've found this Some / None stuff (also there in other languages like F#) a little tricky to understand (although I have not spent a lot of time on it yet).
    - steveklabnik 8y ago
      We talk about it a little, but the best resource on this topic by far is https://blog.burntsushi.net/rust-error-handling/ https://blog.burntsushi.net/rust-error-handling/ which works the whole way from first principles. It was in the first edition of the book but due to space requirements didn’t really fit in the second edition.
      - vram22 8y ago
        Thanks, will check that blog out.
        steveklabnik 8y ago
        No problem! In general, burntsushi’s work is some of the best in Rust. He’s also very fluent in Go.
        vram22 8y ago
        Good to know, will check out his stuff in both languages, thanks.
  - kjeetgill 8y ago
    On a related note, Rust's hygenic macro system is simply amazing. If you're only familiar with macros from C or C++ take a look. The basic idea is that your macro fictions don't use input text and output text. Instead they accept an Abstract Syntax Tree and return a known AS THE. That way the expansion plays well with the grammer. It also manages separate variable scopes well. You only get bleed if you want it. I used to shudder at the thought of macros but I'm convinced. Java or Go could use them reasonably I think. I'm not a rust programer so my understand is probably a little wrong. I'm not intimately familiar with all of the details. Correct me if I'm mistaken!
scubaguy 8y ago
https://blog.golang.org/errors-are-values https://blog.golang.org/errors-are-values This article does not read like "touting as a benefit". Excerpt from it: Still, if the perception persists that one must type if err != nil all the time, something must be wrong, and the obvious target is Go itself. This is unfortunate, misleading, and easily corrected. Perhaps what is happening is that programmers new to Go ask, "How does one handle errors?", learn this pattern, and stop there.
zephyrfalcon 8y ago
"Explicit" doesn't necessarily have to mean "verbose", though.
- stouset 8y ago
  Thank you! You know what’s also “explicit”? Typing out assembly by hand. Somehow everything lower level than Go is totally fine to hide from the developer, but any ergonomics improvements at all and go would “no longer be simple and explicit”.
kybernetikos 8y ago
As far as I'm concerned 'explicit' just means that the behaviour under discussion is caused by some piece of source that talks about that behaviour and not something else. Whether the bit of source is a single character or a paragraph of prose is about verbosity rather than explicitness as long as the behaviour under discussion is caused by a piece of source with precisely that purpose.

gregwebs 8y ago

The question mark in Rust is equally explicit in the case where it can be used to simply pass the error along.

steveklabnik 8y ago
And in cases where you don’t, various combinators let you handle common patterns more easily too. You can also write it Go style if you prefer; we started off with exactly that, then moved to a macro, then turned that macro into ?. That all being said, none of that feels very Go-like, so it makes sense that they haven’t followed what we did.
- everdev 8y ago
  I personally prefer the more concise version :)
- vram22 8y ago
  >You can also write it Go style if you prefer; we started off with exactly that, then moved to a macro, then turned that macro into ?. Interesting. Does the Rust book (you wrote), explain the difference between the Go style and the current Rust style, and explain how to use the Rust style (well)? Asking because I've found this Some / None stuff (also there in other languages like F#) a little tricky to understand (although I have not spent a lot of time on it yet).
  - steveklabnik 8y ago
    We talk about it a little, but the best resource on this topic by far is https://blog.burntsushi.net/rust-error-handling/ https://blog.burntsushi.net/rust-error-handling/ which works the whole way from first principles. It was in the first edition of the book but due to space requirements didn’t really fit in the second edition.
    - vram22 8y ago
      Thanks, will check that blog out.
      - steveklabnik 8y ago
        No problem! In general, burntsushi’s work is some of the best in Rust. He’s also very fluent in Go.
        vram22 8y ago
        Good to know, will check out his stuff in both languages, thanks.
- kjeetgill 8y ago
  On a related note, Rust's hygenic macro system is simply amazing. If you're only familiar with macros from C or C++ take a look. The basic idea is that your macro fictions don't use input text and output text. Instead they accept an Abstract Syntax Tree and return a known AS THE. That way the expansion plays well with the grammer. It also manages separate variable scopes well. You only get bleed if you want it. I used to shudder at the thought of macros but I'm convinced. Java or Go could use them reasonably I think. I'm not a rust programer so my understand is probably a little wrong. I'm not intimately familiar with all of the details. Correct me if I'm mistaken!

scubaguy 8y ago

https://blog.golang.org/errors-are-values https://blog.golang.org/errors-are-values This article does not read like "touting as a benefit". Excerpt from it: Still, if the perception persists that one must type if err != nil all the time, something must be wrong, and the obvious target is Go itself. This is unfortunate, misleading, and easily corrected. Perhaps what is happening is that programmers new to Go ask, "How does one handle errors?", learn this pattern, and stop there.

zephyrfalcon 8y ago

"Explicit" doesn't necessarily have to mean "verbose", though.

stouset 8y ago
Thank you! You know what’s also “explicit”? Typing out assembly by hand. Somehow everything lower level than Go is totally fine to hide from the developer, but any ergonomics improvements at all and go would “no longer be simple and explicit”.

kybernetikos 8y ago

As far as I'm concerned 'explicit' just means that the behaviour under discussion is caused by some piece of source that talks about that behaviour and not something else. Whether the bit of source is a single character or a paragraph of prose is about verbosity rather than explicitness as long as the behaviour under discussion is caused by a piece of source with precisely that purpose.