6 ms·

"This is encouraging news for a language already known to be unusually both fast and easy" Hmm it's not known for that, is it? Go is known to be quite slow due

"This is encouraging news for a language already known to be unusually both fast and easy" Hmm it's not known for that, is it? Go is known to be quite slow due to a weak compiler and a GC that optimizes for latency over throughput. And is Go really easier than a language like Java or in the dynamic world, JavaScript? It sure does seem to have a lot of weird edge cases and potholes to trip over. Anyway I see a bunch of comments saying generics shouldn't make anything faster. They can make code go faster in combination with specialization and value types. It's one of the reasons C++ can go very fast whilst still supporting higher level abstractions, albeit at the cost of generated code size. It's also the reason they're adding value types and specialized generics to the JVM. I don't know if Go is doing C++/Rust style specialization or not, but it at least has the potential to do so.

laumars 5y ago
> Hmm it's not known for that, is it? It’s a hugely generalised statement so the real answer is “it really depends on your context” Is it fast compared to other easy to learn languages? Definitely. Is it fast compared to other systems languages? Lol no. But is it fast to compile compared to other systems languages? Generally, yeah. Is it easy to learn compared to other systems languages? Very much so. Is it easy to write complex low level systems logic? No. Is it easy to write dynamic code? No. The problem with generalised statements against general purpose languages is that the scope is so wide that people will cherry whatever context they want to suit whatever argument (for or against) they choose.
- threeseed 5y ago
  > Is it easy to learn compared to other systems languages? Very much so. I think this is debatable and depends on your background. If you come from a Java/C background then many things are unintuitive e.g. error handling, dynamic interfaces, package/library management, whitespace parsing, style enforcement etc. Golang is easy to learn right now because it's basic like say Java 1.2. But since it likes to ignore what other languages do I wouldn't say it's an inherently easy language.
  - Gravityloss 5y ago
    Even then, it's remarkably easy to read Go programs. This is very important.
    - threeseed 5y ago
      I do code reviews for Go every day and it is easy but also frustrating and tiresome. The ridiculously antiquated error handling and the absence of modern FP constructs e.g. filter/map means that 1 line of Scala/Swift/Rust/Java etc code = 10 of Go.
      - preseinger 5y ago
        There's nothing "antiquated" about Go's error handling. It expresses a position that you might not agree with -- that errors are no less important than happy path code -- but that's not right or wrong, it's just a position.
      - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
        > e.g. filter/map means that 1 line of Scala/Swift/Rust/Java etc code = 10 of Go. Honestly, fuck this noise. I hope this never makes its way to Go. Densely packing logic is not inherently better. I've done enough Scala/Rust/Java reviews and those are frustrating and tiresome.
        jen20 5y ago
        On the contrary I hope generics in Go mean that bug hives of mutation in loops get replaced ASAP with higher order functions. I for one have plans to work through several code bases and do just this starting the second Go 1.18 lands.
      - cultofmetatron 5y ago
        the lack of filter/reduce and other higher order functions is precisely what keeps me out of go. I don't want to be restricted to what I learned about programming in my first year. Go forces me to code like a first year college student.
- deepsun 5y ago
  Yes I saw that internally at Google in early days of Go, people often said that Go is going to replace either Java, or C++, depending on context. So I felt like it's going to take a niche somewhere in between those two..
- ohCh6zos 5y ago
  Go isn't even easy to learn compared to high level languages let alone system language. It is the only language I ever gave up on after 3 months of struggle I concluded I'd rather work with anything else.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - laumars 5y ago
    You’re conflating “easy to learn” with “easy to program for” sigh. And that wasn’t even the point of the post so you got that part wrong too. In fact did you even bother to read the thread before jumping in with that post? The point wasn’t whether Go is easy or not, it’s that “easy” means different things to different people (like here where you conflate “easy to learn” with “easy to use” thus “easy” meant something different to you vs the rest of the English speaking population). So arguing about a generalised term with zero context is stupid. Just as stupid as the editor wars of the 90s and Linux DE wars of the 00s. I guess some people just like to browbeat their peers into believing personal preference isn’t a thing.
  - dustinmoris 5y ago
    Wow, which language did you find easier to learn than Go? HTML doesn't count.
    - ohCh6zos 5y ago
      This is going to sound weird but I picked up both Rust and Erlang far faster than Go. Edit: my point isn’t that others shouldn’t enjoy it but it being easy is not universal or to be taken as given.
CraigJPerry 5y ago
>> Go is known to be quite slow I understood it was comparable to Java or C#, both of which are extremely fast - both in terms of execution speed and more so in terms of developer productivity. The benchmarks I’ve seen generally back that up https://plummerssoftwarellc.github.io/PrimeView/report?id=davepl-1642852131.json&hi=False&hf=False&hp=False&fi=&fp=&fa=&ff=&fb=&tp=False&sc=pp&sd=True https://plummerssoftwarellc.github.io/PrimeView/report?id=da... 9th overall - faster than c++ for example in Dave Plummers primes benchmark. I quite like that benchmark because it’s really just a bunch of memory operations, a decent view of the compilers ability to generate decent code. Although my concern with this benchmark is that not all languages got the same optimisation effort. Looking at git commits, it seems like rust got almost more optimisation effort than every other language combined. Also i don’t like the unfiltered view of that benchmark - lisp comes out fastest language of all but that’s because languages like c++ and Rust can only really pre calculate results at compile time (constexpr etc) - whereas that lisp implementation is doing everything before compilation. Unfair because other languages don’t have a programmable precompilation reader phase. https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/box-plot-summary-charts.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... In the area of java, Swift etc i don’t like these benchmarks at all though. The c# one for example often relies on c libraries or vector intrinsics etc so it’s not really like for like. https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&hw=ph&test=composite https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&hw=... Between java and c#
- igouy 5y ago
  > … not really like for like… Except when it is: this C# program seems to have been transliterated from the Java program — mandelbrot C# .NET #5 https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/program/mandelbrot-csharpcore-5.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... mandelbrot Java #2 https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/program/mandelbrot-java-2.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... And in the listing — https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/performance/mandelbrot.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
  - 5y ago
edwnj 5y ago
Your missing the point, javascript is easier but in the class of languages go is in, its a day and night difference. rust, c/c++, java etc. Compared to these languages, go is much easer to learn and use. Java can be put the side, the real comparison is with c/c++ and rust. By taking some trade offs on the performance side, go has a much better UX than rust/c.. Literally open up a few tabs, go to github and compare a page of go code vs rust vs c/c++..
rawoke083600 5y ago
>Hmm it's not known for that, is it? Go is known to be quite slow due to a weak compiler and a GC that optimizes for latency over throughput. ? Lol what ? Go is generally 'the' tool me and quite a few of my friends reach for when they want todo some heavy-lifting without getting bogged down in the weeds of things. Sure you millage may vary. And in your view Go might be slow (compared to) ? But Go is definitely NOT slow for any sort of general computing. Faster than NodeJS, (ok i'm cherry picking now) mostly on par or with C# or Java depending on your benchmark-magic of choice. Super easy to do multicore and concurrency with it and definitely faster to compile than Rust. Does it have warts or not the best language ? Absolutely ! But it's definitely not know to be "quite slow" and having a "weak compiler" ?? To be honest in this is the first time I've heard that exact claim "quite slow" :/
- native_samples 5y ago
  Of course it's faster than JavaScript. I meant slow compared to comparable languages like C++ or Java (statically typed with high effort compilers).
  - rawoke083600 5y ago
    It's not slow compared to Java or C++ !?? LOL show me benchmarks where is slower and I will show you benchmarks where it's faster !
marcos100 5y ago
It's been a long time that I developed in Go, but at the time I though it was a better python. As easy as python, but faster. At least for backend stuff. Does it have a lot of weird edge cases? Probably yes. I'm no expert in Go, but I don't think it has more or less than any other language.
37ef_ced3 5y ago
Go is fast. Generally speaking, you can expect a well-written Go program to be no more than 50% slower than well-written C. Normally the Go program will only be 5% or 10% slower. Saying this another way, a carefully written C program that takes 100 seconds to run can be converted to Go and might take 150 seconds to run, in a bad case. In a typical situation the Go program will take 110 seconds to run. Of course, a bad programmer can make anything slow.
- native_samples 5y ago
  I'm not sure how you get from 50% slowdown to fast. That's my point - in the space of ahead-of-time compiled, statically typed languages Go produces code that runs significantly slower than other languages. Even if you include JITCd languages it's not that fast. It's an intentional choice, so I really don't even know why this is proving controversial - Go's designers were always crystal clear that their priorities are: 1. A fast AOT compiler (which therefore, cannot spend much time optimizing things) 2. A low latency GC (which therefore, sacrifices throughput) 3. Ease of use (which therefore, means avoiding complicating the language with optimization related features) Not included: raw performance.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - 37ef_ced3 5y ago
    Because there's a point where additional performance doesn't matter. Using C instead of Go is a mistake for all but the most performance critical applications. Use C for small pieces of code that need maximum performance. Use Go everywhere else. If you're writing a compiler, use Go: it's easily fast enough and very programmer-efficient. If you're writing SIMD convolution code, use C. For example, here is my compiler (written in Go) that generates AVX-512 neural net convolution code in C: https://NN-512.com https://NN-512.com For almost all purposes, Go is a better choice than C. Go is almost always fast enough by a wide margin, and the resulting program is easier to write and higher quality.
  - Mawr 5y ago
preseinger 5y ago
> Go is known to be quite slow due to a weak compiler and a GC that optimizes for latency over throughput. I don't know how you're measuring "slow" but from where I sit in the software ecosystem Go is typically one of, if not _the_, fastest language available. It's entirely correct to optimize for latency over throughput, for my use cases.

laumars 5y ago

> Hmm it's not known for that, is it? It’s a hugely generalised statement so the real answer is “it really depends on your context” Is it fast compared to other easy to learn languages? Definitely. Is it fast compared to other systems languages? Lol no. But is it fast to compile compared to other systems languages? Generally, yeah. Is it easy to learn compared to other systems languages? Very much so. Is it easy to write complex low level systems logic? No. Is it easy to write dynamic code? No. The problem with generalised statements against general purpose languages is that the scope is so wide that people will cherry whatever context they want to suit whatever argument (for or against) they choose.

threeseed 5y ago
> Is it easy to learn compared to other systems languages? Very much so. I think this is debatable and depends on your background. If you come from a Java/C background then many things are unintuitive e.g. error handling, dynamic interfaces, package/library management, whitespace parsing, style enforcement etc. Golang is easy to learn right now because it's basic like say Java 1.2. But since it likes to ignore what other languages do I wouldn't say it's an inherently easy language.
- Gravityloss 5y ago
  Even then, it's remarkably easy to read Go programs. This is very important.
  - threeseed 5y ago
    I do code reviews for Go every day and it is easy but also frustrating and tiresome. The ridiculously antiquated error handling and the absence of modern FP constructs e.g. filter/map means that 1 line of Scala/Swift/Rust/Java etc code = 10 of Go.
    - preseinger 5y ago
      There's nothing "antiquated" about Go's error handling. It expresses a position that you might not agree with -- that errors are no less important than happy path code -- but that's not right or wrong, it's just a position.
    - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
      > e.g. filter/map means that 1 line of Scala/Swift/Rust/Java etc code = 10 of Go. Honestly, fuck this noise. I hope this never makes its way to Go. Densely packing logic is not inherently better. I've done enough Scala/Rust/Java reviews and those are frustrating and tiresome.
      - jen20 5y ago
        On the contrary I hope generics in Go mean that bug hives of mutation in loops get replaced ASAP with higher order functions. I for one have plans to work through several code bases and do just this starting the second Go 1.18 lands.
    - cultofmetatron 5y ago
      the lack of filter/reduce and other higher order functions is precisely what keeps me out of go. I don't want to be restricted to what I learned about programming in my first year. Go forces me to code like a first year college student.
deepsun 5y ago
Yes I saw that internally at Google in early days of Go, people often said that Go is going to replace either Java, or C++, depending on context. So I felt like it's going to take a niche somewhere in between those two..
ohCh6zos 5y ago
Go isn't even easy to learn compared to high level languages let alone system language. It is the only language I ever gave up on after 3 months of struggle I concluded I'd rather work with anything else.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- laumars 5y ago
  You’re conflating “easy to learn” with “easy to program for” sigh. And that wasn’t even the point of the post so you got that part wrong too. In fact did you even bother to read the thread before jumping in with that post? The point wasn’t whether Go is easy or not, it’s that “easy” means different things to different people (like here where you conflate “easy to learn” with “easy to use” thus “easy” meant something different to you vs the rest of the English speaking population). So arguing about a generalised term with zero context is stupid. Just as stupid as the editor wars of the 90s and Linux DE wars of the 00s. I guess some people just like to browbeat their peers into believing personal preference isn’t a thing.
- dustinmoris 5y ago
  Wow, which language did you find easier to learn than Go? HTML doesn't count.
  - ohCh6zos 5y ago
    This is going to sound weird but I picked up both Rust and Erlang far faster than Go. Edit: my point isn’t that others shouldn’t enjoy it but it being easy is not universal or to be taken as given.

CraigJPerry 5y ago

>> Go is known to be quite slow I understood it was comparable to Java or C#, both of which are extremely fast - both in terms of execution speed and more so in terms of developer productivity. The benchmarks I’ve seen generally back that up https://plummerssoftwarellc.github.io/PrimeView/report?id=davepl-1642852131.json&hi=False&hf=False&hp=False&fi=&fp=&fa=&ff=&fb=&tp=False&sc=pp&sd=True https://plummerssoftwarellc.github.io/PrimeView/report?id=da... 9th overall - faster than c++ for example in Dave Plummers primes benchmark. I quite like that benchmark because it’s really just a bunch of memory operations, a decent view of the compilers ability to generate decent code. Although my concern with this benchmark is that not all languages got the same optimisation effort. Looking at git commits, it seems like rust got almost more optimisation effort than every other language combined. Also i don’t like the unfiltered view of that benchmark - lisp comes out fastest language of all but that’s because languages like c++ and Rust can only really pre calculate results at compile time (constexpr etc) - whereas that lisp implementation is doing everything before compilation. Unfair because other languages don’t have a programmable precompilation reader phase. https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/box-plot-summary-charts.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... In the area of java, Swift etc i don’t like these benchmarks at all though. The c# one for example often relies on c libraries or vector intrinsics etc so it’s not really like for like. https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&hw=ph&test=composite https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&hw=... Between java and c#

igouy 5y ago
> … not really like for like… Except when it is: this C# program seems to have been transliterated from the Java program — mandelbrot C# .NET #5 https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/program/mandelbrot-csharpcore-5.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... mandelbrot Java #2 https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/program/mandelbrot-java-2.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... And in the listing — https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/performance/mandelbrot.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
- 5y ago

edwnj 5y ago

Your missing the point, javascript is easier but in the class of languages go is in, its a day and night difference. rust, c/c++, java etc. Compared to these languages, go is much easer to learn and use. Java can be put the side, the real comparison is with c/c++ and rust. By taking some trade offs on the performance side, go has a much better UX than rust/c.. Literally open up a few tabs, go to github and compare a page of go code vs rust vs c/c++..

rawoke083600 5y ago

>Hmm it's not known for that, is it? Go is known to be quite slow due to a weak compiler and a GC that optimizes for latency over throughput. ? Lol what ? Go is generally 'the' tool me and quite a few of my friends reach for when they want todo some heavy-lifting without getting bogged down in the weeds of things. Sure you millage may vary. And in your view Go might be slow (compared to) ? But Go is definitely NOT slow for any sort of general computing. Faster than NodeJS, (ok i'm cherry picking now) mostly on par or with C# or Java depending on your benchmark-magic of choice. Super easy to do multicore and concurrency with it and definitely faster to compile than Rust. Does it have warts or not the best language ? Absolutely ! But it's definitely not know to be "quite slow" and having a "weak compiler" ?? To be honest in this is the first time I've heard that exact claim "quite slow" :/

native_samples 5y ago
Of course it's faster than JavaScript. I meant slow compared to comparable languages like C++ or Java (statically typed with high effort compilers).
- rawoke083600 5y ago
  It's not slow compared to Java or C++ !?? LOL show me benchmarks where is slower and I will show you benchmarks where it's faster !

marcos100 5y ago

It's been a long time that I developed in Go, but at the time I though it was a better python. As easy as python, but faster. At least for backend stuff. Does it have a lot of weird edge cases? Probably yes. I'm no expert in Go, but I don't think it has more or less than any other language.

37ef_ced3 5y ago

Go is fast. Generally speaking, you can expect a well-written Go program to be no more than 50% slower than well-written C. Normally the Go program will only be 5% or 10% slower. Saying this another way, a carefully written C program that takes 100 seconds to run can be converted to Go and might take 150 seconds to run, in a bad case. In a typical situation the Go program will take 110 seconds to run. Of course, a bad programmer can make anything slow.

native_samples 5y ago
I'm not sure how you get from 50% slowdown to fast. That's my point - in the space of ahead-of-time compiled, statically typed languages Go produces code that runs significantly slower than other languages. Even if you include JITCd languages it's not that fast. It's an intentional choice, so I really don't even know why this is proving controversial - Go's designers were always crystal clear that their priorities are: 1. A fast AOT compiler (which therefore, cannot spend much time optimizing things) 2. A low latency GC (which therefore, sacrifices throughput) 3. Ease of use (which therefore, means avoiding complicating the language with optimization related features) Not included: raw performance.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- 37ef_ced3 5y ago
  Because there's a point where additional performance doesn't matter. Using C instead of Go is a mistake for all but the most performance critical applications. Use C for small pieces of code that need maximum performance. Use Go everywhere else. If you're writing a compiler, use Go: it's easily fast enough and very programmer-efficient. If you're writing SIMD convolution code, use C. For example, here is my compiler (written in Go) that generates AVX-512 neural net convolution code in C: https://NN-512.com https://NN-512.com For almost all purposes, Go is a better choice than C. Go is almost always fast enough by a wide margin, and the resulting program is easier to write and higher quality.
- Mawr 5y ago

preseinger 5y ago

> Go is known to be quite slow due to a weak compiler and a GC that optimizes for latency over throughput. I don't know how you're measuring "slow" but from where I sit in the software ecosystem Go is typically one of, if not _the_, fastest language available. It's entirely correct to optimize for latency over throughput, for my use cases.