3 ms·
Is Ruby "ruthlessly productive" for building a fast, highly concurrent program that can be deployed to X platforms with minimal fuss? No. Is Golang "ruthlessly
by pphysch 5y ago
Is Ruby "ruthlessly productive" for building a fast, highly concurrent program that can be deployed to X platforms with minimal fuss? No.
Is Golang "ruthlessly productive" for interfacing with complex relational databases? No, not even with generics.
Tradeoffs, every language has 'em.
- Scarbutt 5y agoWhat mainstream programming language is good for interfacing with complex relational databases?
- AlchemistCamp 5y agoElixir is great at it and becoming increasingly mainstream.
- golergka 5y agoSQL. Typescript with library like pgtyped basically allows you to write raw SQL queries and then generates all the static typings for them.
- norman784 5y agoRust is getting there, with sqlx[0] you can write plain sql and it gets validated at compile time. [0]https://github.com/launchbadge/sqlx https://github.com/launchbadge/sqlx
- pphysch 5y agoAny language with metaprogramming like operator overloading so you can create an ergonomic ORM, basically. For such a language to be reasonably productive you want to be able to overload "mystruct.myvar" to not simply grab "myvar" from memory, but smartly fetch it from a remote database, cache it, etc. It will never be perfect (blah blah impedence mismatch) but a proper ORM is so much more productive and readable than writing crap like `Manager(mystruct).GetAttr("myvar")...` or bespoke SQL composition.
- mixedCase 5y agoF# by way of type providers. Many other languages could similarly bridge the gap with codegen.
- jatone 5y ago> Is Golang "ruthlessly productive" for interfacing with complex relational databases? neither is ruby lol.