3 ms·

Yes. Look into Go. Between the conversions and source placement, the built-in "go" tool understands source placement and how to compile everything. No configura

Yes. Look into Go. Between the conversions and source placement, the built-in "go" tool understands source placement and how to compile everything. No configuration, project file, Makefile, Autoconfig, Configure file needed.

zbentley 4y ago
Well, there's still a build system (and an opinionated one!) in the mix, it just happens to be vendored into the same executable that provides the language/compiler. And that's great! A lot of folks like that tight integration.
denton-scratch 4y ago
So the solution to this guy's problem with build-systems is to use a different language? (Not just you, several commenters have proposed that solution). It's a bit like saying "Oh, that's because you're using Linux; get a better OS".
- spfzero 4y ago
  Well, he did mention he had tried a few different languages, so maybe they're actually looking for a some of these suggestions?
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    Well, I guess I'm a slow learner; I reckon on it taking me a minimum of 6 months to become competent in a new language. It's not just the syntax and the libraries; every language I've ever used has had heffalump traps, but even if there are no traps, you still have to become sure there are none. Most programmers I've worked with have become comfortable with a new language much faster than me.
    - 8192kjshad09- 4y ago
      If you already know how to program in a curly braces language then you can be productive in Go in a few weeks. The language is surprisingly minimal. Like everything, it has footguns, but for the most part there are really no new concepts to learn Go.
- readme 4y ago
  it is a solution to his python grievance somewhat having a decent standard library saves you from needing to use a bunch of 3rd party modules that may or may not need to be compiled
sidlls 4y ago
Make still helps with go, if for no other reason than to simply provide shortcuts (e.g. `make test` instead of the `go test` command with all its options one has to type out. The Makefiles are generally quite simple, though.
- monkpit 4y ago
  That’s not really any different than a shell script, right?
  - sidlls 4y ago
    They compose differently and non-trivial projects still benefit from build tooling even with go.
adinisom 4y ago
Can confirm. I don't program in Go but when there's Go software that needs fixing, it's so much easier to "go build" it and fix bugs in this unfamiliar language than it is merely to compile software written in many more familiar languages. Build systems that just work is a huge advantage.

zbentley 4y ago

Well, there's still a build system (and an opinionated one!) in the mix, it just happens to be vendored into the same executable that provides the language/compiler. And that's great! A lot of folks like that tight integration.

denton-scratch 4y ago

So the solution to this guy's problem with build-systems is to use a different language? (Not just you, several commenters have proposed that solution). It's a bit like saying "Oh, that's because you're using Linux; get a better OS".

spfzero 4y ago
Well, he did mention he had tried a few different languages, so maybe they're actually looking for a some of these suggestions?
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  Well, I guess I'm a slow learner; I reckon on it taking me a minimum of 6 months to become competent in a new language. It's not just the syntax and the libraries; every language I've ever used has had heffalump traps, but even if there are no traps, you still have to become sure there are none. Most programmers I've worked with have become comfortable with a new language much faster than me.
  - 8192kjshad09- 4y ago
    If you already know how to program in a curly braces language then you can be productive in Go in a few weeks. The language is surprisingly minimal. Like everything, it has footguns, but for the most part there are really no new concepts to learn Go.
readme 4y ago
it is a solution to his python grievance somewhat having a decent standard library saves you from needing to use a bunch of 3rd party modules that may or may not need to be compiled

sidlls 4y ago

Make still helps with go, if for no other reason than to simply provide shortcuts (e.g. `make test` instead of the `go test` command with all its options one has to type out. The Makefiles are generally quite simple, though.

monkpit 4y ago
That’s not really any different than a shell script, right?
- sidlls 4y ago
  They compose differently and non-trivial projects still benefit from build tooling even with go.

adinisom 4y ago

Can confirm. I don't program in Go but when there's Go software that needs fixing, it's so much easier to "go build" it and fix bugs in this unfamiliar language than it is merely to compile software written in many more familiar languages. Build systems that just work is a huge advantage.