5 ms·

Go is the new Java. It runs everywhere, is easy to learn and use and people who don't get it hate it with passion. Anyway, comparing go documentation with rus

Go is the new Java. It runs everywhere, is easy to learn and use and people who don't get it hate it with passion. Anyway, comparing go documentation with rust docs, I'm surprised anyone can get any work done with rust.

kerng 7y ago
I'd say Go is more like Basic.
schrodinger 7y ago
I’m a devout Go developer and I feel like this is accurate. It’s got some uglies (eg no generics, verbosity in general), but man, overall, it’s so pleasant to work with. Which is probably how great Java developers feel. Thanks for inspiring empathy!!!
- paulddraper 7y ago
  And Java also didn't start with generics either. They were bolted on later. Which is why it uses type erasure for generics rather than reification like C#.
  - cpx86 7y ago
    C# didn't either, it was introduced in C#/.NET 2.0. As I've understood it, Java chose type erasure to stay backwards compatible with older JDK versions, whereas .NET instead chose to break compatibility with 1.x and force dependents to target 2.0.
littlestymaar 7y ago
> Anyway, comparing go documentation with rust docs, I'm surprised anyone can get any work done with rust. That's an unexpected comment. Rust has among the best documentation I've seen, and arguably the best ecosystem around documentation, which helps a lot and encourage third party developers to write high quality doc. I understand when people complain about the learning curve (like this article, because fighting the borrowchecker is only a thing while learning) but docs, really?
- mkr-hn 7y ago
  For comparison: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/fmt/index.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/fmt/index.html https://golang.org/pkg/fmt/ https://golang.org/pkg/fmt/ I don't know why I find Go's version easier to follow, but I do.
  - setr 7y ago
    In terms of content, they seem to be on par, and I think it's safe to say that's true for both stdlibs. Across the ecosystem (and particularly the third-party culture of documentation) is much more important; in my own experience playing with both languages, I tended to encounter more useless 1-line descriptions in golang than I did in Rust. Also golang struct descriptions always seem to be a bit lackluster.. But I can't point to any particular lib at the moment though.
  - steveklabnik 7y ago
    Context: I wrote most of the stdlib docs the fmt docs are... not ideal. That said, there's a lot there, and it's all useful, but it's just tough. Frankly, I just punted on improving them, and haven't taken the time to do so in the years since.
    - mkr-hn 7y ago
      It seems like enough people find their way around them. Refinement might make them easier for people like me with less experience navigating language documentation, but that might come at the expense of developing the language. Priorities are important. Especially since Rust doesn't have Google's resources.
  - littlestymaar 7y ago
    Even if it's not the author's favorite piece of doc, this is still a pretty good example of why I like rust docs. The rust version has : - syntax highlighting - a quick example of the feature
- lacker 7y ago
  I am not a fan of Rust’s documentation. To take one example: sending a HTTP request. There is tons of documentation of properties of the the HTTP classes built into the standard library, but it is extremely hard to find an example of working code. Wouldn’t a simple usage example of something like sending a single HTTP request be one of the most useful things to document? As far as I can tell, the best-documented approach is to use some external library and ignore the http support built into Rust.
warmind99 7y ago
Agreed, the Rust docs seriously suck, but once you get used to the language you can write incredibly fast code witgh only about 15% more effort than Python. Also, Cargo.toml is great.

kerng 7y ago

I'd say Go is more like Basic.

schrodinger 7y ago

I’m a devout Go developer and I feel like this is accurate. It’s got some uglies (eg no generics, verbosity in general), but man, overall, it’s so pleasant to work with. Which is probably how great Java developers feel. Thanks for inspiring empathy!!!

paulddraper 7y ago
And Java also didn't start with generics either. They were bolted on later. Which is why it uses type erasure for generics rather than reification like C#.
- cpx86 7y ago
  C# didn't either, it was introduced in C#/.NET 2.0. As I've understood it, Java chose type erasure to stay backwards compatible with older JDK versions, whereas .NET instead chose to break compatibility with 1.x and force dependents to target 2.0.

littlestymaar 7y ago

> Anyway, comparing go documentation with rust docs, I'm surprised anyone can get any work done with rust. That's an unexpected comment. Rust has among the best documentation I've seen, and arguably the best ecosystem around documentation, which helps a lot and encourage third party developers to write high quality doc. I understand when people complain about the learning curve (like this article, because fighting the borrowchecker is only a thing while learning) but docs, really?

mkr-hn 7y ago
For comparison: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/fmt/index.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/fmt/index.html https://golang.org/pkg/fmt/ https://golang.org/pkg/fmt/ I don't know why I find Go's version easier to follow, but I do.
- setr 7y ago
  In terms of content, they seem to be on par, and I think it's safe to say that's true for both stdlibs. Across the ecosystem (and particularly the third-party culture of documentation) is much more important; in my own experience playing with both languages, I tended to encounter more useless 1-line descriptions in golang than I did in Rust. Also golang struct descriptions always seem to be a bit lackluster.. But I can't point to any particular lib at the moment though.
- steveklabnik 7y ago
  Context: I wrote most of the stdlib docs the fmt docs are... not ideal. That said, there's a lot there, and it's all useful, but it's just tough. Frankly, I just punted on improving them, and haven't taken the time to do so in the years since.
  - mkr-hn 7y ago
    It seems like enough people find their way around them. Refinement might make them easier for people like me with less experience navigating language documentation, but that might come at the expense of developing the language. Priorities are important. Especially since Rust doesn't have Google's resources.
- littlestymaar 7y ago
  Even if it's not the author's favorite piece of doc, this is still a pretty good example of why I like rust docs. The rust version has : - syntax highlighting - a quick example of the feature
lacker 7y ago
I am not a fan of Rust’s documentation. To take one example: sending a HTTP request. There is tons of documentation of properties of the the HTTP classes built into the standard library, but it is extremely hard to find an example of working code. Wouldn’t a simple usage example of something like sending a single HTTP request be one of the most useful things to document? As far as I can tell, the best-documented approach is to use some external library and ignore the http support built into Rust.

warmind99 7y ago

Agreed, the Rust docs seriously suck, but once you get used to the language you can write incredibly fast code witgh only about 15% more effort than Python. Also, Cargo.toml is great.