3 ms·

Prive has a specific meaning. Are you seeking proveble code like box logic and Haskell? Or do you seek someone to, rather than prove one screwdriver is less er

Prive has a specific meaning. Are you seeking proveble code like box logic and Haskell? Or do you seek someone to, rather than prove one screwdriver is less error prone than another, to demonstrate it is? If so, that would depend on context of screws, wood, lefthandedness. A proof in a special case is especially limited. So a demonstration. Can you demonstrate Go's method of error hanling for a specific context is superior? Yes, you can.

CharlieDigital 2y ago
Prove as in statistical evidence that code and teams working with Go yield software that has lower rates of runtime defects, has faster time to debug runtime errors, has improved the productivity of developers because of its obviously superior design and philosophy of error handling, etc. These are all measurable. Productivity is measurable. Defect rates are measurable. Time to debug is measurable. If there's a peer reviewed paper, let's see it. If there's not, you should produce it and get hired by the Go team! If this is indeed the superior way of handling errors: varFoo, err := GetFoo() if err != nil { return err } and not just excess key strokes and preference of style, then there will be some statistical side effect that can be measured to prove its superiority. If you can't prove it, all you're saying is "I prefer purple because purple is obviously superior to blue! Can't you see!"...O...K.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
lolinder 2y ago
You're being pedantic, and as is often the case when people are pedantic you're also wrong [0]. Their use of the word "prove" is entirely consistent with standard definitions, and "demonstrate" is listed as a synonym for "prove". > Can you demonstrate Go's method of error hanling for a specific context is superior? Yes, you can. Then please do! Articles like this one are entirely subjective and anecdote-oriented, not evidence-based proofs (or demonstrations if you like). [0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prove https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prove

CharlieDigital 2y ago

Prove as in statistical evidence that code and teams working with Go yield software that has lower rates of runtime defects, has faster time to debug runtime errors, has improved the productivity of developers because of its obviously superior design and philosophy of error handling, etc. These are all measurable. Productivity is measurable. Defect rates are measurable. Time to debug is measurable. If there's a peer reviewed paper, let's see it. If there's not, you should produce it and get hired by the Go team! If this is indeed the superior way of handling errors: varFoo, err := GetFoo() if err != nil { return err } and not just excess key strokes and preference of style, then there will be some statistical side effect that can be measured to prove its superiority. If you can't prove it, all you're saying is "I prefer purple because purple is obviously superior to blue! Can't you see!"...O...K.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

lolinder 2y ago

You're being pedantic, and as is often the case when people are pedantic you're also wrong [0]. Their use of the word "prove" is entirely consistent with standard definitions, and "demonstrate" is listed as a synonym for "prove". > Can you demonstrate Go's method of error hanling for a specific context is superior? Yes, you can. Then please do! Articles like this one are entirely subjective and anecdote-oriented, not evidence-based proofs (or demonstrations if you like). [0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prove https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prove