3 ms·
Anybody has experience with how it stacks up against TinyGo [1]? [1] https://tinygo.org/ https://tinygo.org/
by samuell 4y ago
Anybody has experience with how it stacks up against TinyGo [1]?
[1] https://tinygo.org/ https://tinygo.org/
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rahen 4y agoHow large are typical binaries with TinyGo? Go is a great tradeoff, it's about as easy to learn and fast to write as Python for prototyping, while being a much slicker, faster, compiled language. But will the runtime fit a tiny MCU PROM? edit: A Hello World written in Go and compiled with TinyGo is just 10kB! https://tinygo.org/getting-started/overview/ https://tinygo.org/getting-started/overview/ It also works on Arduino Nanos, has builtin support for UART, SPI, I2C and PWM, and can also generate Linux binaries. This is a great find!
- jrockway 4y agoYeah, it's a completely different runtime. I think the purists might argue that it's a completely different language, but it feels similar enough that you don't get too upset about the occasional language feature that doesn't work. I remember using time.Format(time.RFC3339) in a project once. Seemed impossible to have such convenience on a microcontroller, and I probably paid a lot for it, but it did work perfectly.
- rahen 4y agoIf performance is adequate (say 1/3 of C, or 10x faster than Python), this is a big deal. It means we get a simple, nicely designed language with a great standard library, short development times, and small, performant binaries once compiled. Go on MCUs was out of question because of its runtime size. I'll keep an eye on this.