4 ms·

> The libraries for Go aren't as good as for Python– certainly, the documentation is lacking Huh, Go has some of the best autodoc features of any language. Als

> The libraries for Go aren't as good as for Python– certainly, the documentation is lacking Huh, Go has some of the best autodoc features of any language. Also the library assertion is insane to me. I switch back and forth from Go to Python all day and generally Go has more stable better maintained libs

Zopieux 4y ago
Sadly I agree with the author on the general feel of Go libraries. I can feel the language design itself and non-written philosophical identity of Go strongly affects what APIs people write in it. Most often, they suck. They feel monolithic, unforgiving, and impossible to extend. I don't belive we can only blame the lack of generics for that, it runs deeper. On documentation, I've never seen a language community that comes with so little examples most of the time. Take any random Python library RTD, it's full of it. You can skim through said examples to understand the overall features and capabilities before you dive into the API reference. No such luck in Go: here is the bare-bones godoc, good luck!
- mountainriver 4y ago
  The bare bones godoc is generally fine because the language is so easy. Python needs the examples because most of the libraries have no types so you would have no idea whats happening without examples
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > The bare bones godoc is generally fine because the language is so easy. No, it's not. > Python needs the examples because most of the libraries have no types so you would have no idea whats happening without examples That’s not the main reason examples and narrative explanations in documentation are useful, but if the false belief that it is has helpe to fuel the Python documentation culture, I’m not going to complain too much.
bitcurious 4y ago
Autodoc is great when you want to know "how do I use this function" but I find that projects that rely on it inevitable fail to answer "why do I use this function" which is usually the harder question.

Zopieux 4y ago

Sadly I agree with the author on the general feel of Go libraries. I can feel the language design itself and non-written philosophical identity of Go strongly affects what APIs people write in it. Most often, they suck. They feel monolithic, unforgiving, and impossible to extend. I don't belive we can only blame the lack of generics for that, it runs deeper. On documentation, I've never seen a language community that comes with so little examples most of the time. Take any random Python library RTD, it's full of it. You can skim through said examples to understand the overall features and capabilities before you dive into the API reference. No such luck in Go: here is the bare-bones godoc, good luck!

mountainriver 4y ago
The bare bones godoc is generally fine because the language is so easy. Python needs the examples because most of the libraries have no types so you would have no idea whats happening without examples
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > The bare bones godoc is generally fine because the language is so easy. No, it's not. > Python needs the examples because most of the libraries have no types so you would have no idea whats happening without examples That’s not the main reason examples and narrative explanations in documentation are useful, but if the false belief that it is has helpe to fuel the Python documentation culture, I’m not going to complain too much.

bitcurious 4y ago

Autodoc is great when you want to know "how do I use this function" but I find that projects that rely on it inevitable fail to answer "why do I use this function" which is usually the harder question.