3 ms·
Golang might be better for writing robust software, if that is the goal. Robust services that don't go down.
by sgt 2y ago
Golang might be better for writing robust software, if that is the goal. Robust services that don't go down.
- NoTeslaThrow 2y agoHell, just go full erlang at that point and you get loads of services for "free".
- efnx 2y agoAnd why is that? I already don’t agree, but I’d love to hear your take.
- surajrmal 2y agoMentioning golang is a rust article comment section is just bait. People just live comparing the two even though it's somewhat boring comparison
- pjmlp 2y agoFirst they have to improve the memory model due to possible races when sharing slices due to their fat pointers implementation.
- neillyons 2y agoGolang will panic with a runtime error index out of range if you index out of bounds. There doesn't seem to be a nice built in way to do `arr.get(3)` like in Rust. slice := []int{1, 2, 3} i := slice[3] fmt.Println(i)
- IshKebab 2y agoI don't think so. Rust has much stronger typing than Go which allows you to prevent more classes of bugs than just memory errors. The coolest one I've heard is that Fuchsia's network stack managed to eliminate deadlocks. But even on a basic level Rust has that "if it compiles it works" experience which Go definitely doesn't.
- Mond_ 2y ago> The coolest one I've heard is that Fuchsia's network stack managed to eliminate deadlocks. Is there a write up on this? That's very cool
- diarrhea 2y agoIIRC it is just having locks with exclusive constructors, which take previous locks’ guards (by ownership?). That way you can never lock lock B if you have not received a guard aka lock from lock A prior. Ensured on the type level. I suppose doing this at scale is a real challenge.
- jelder 2y agoThe general term for this is "Session types." The Par crate is probably the most mature attempt at this to date. https://github.com/faiface/par https://github.com/faiface/par
- aw1621107 2y agoI think that example comes from the talk "Safety in an Unsafe World" [0, slides at 1]. There are some crates which implement lock ordering as well (e.g., [2, 3]). lock-ordering states it's inspired by the technique discussed in the talk as well, for what it's worth. [0]: https://youtu.be/qd3x5MCUrhw?t=1001 https://youtu.be/qd3x5MCUrhw?t=1001 (~16:41 in case the timestamp link doesn't work) [1]: https://joshlf.com/files/talks/Safety%20in%20an%20Unsafe%20World.pdf https://joshlf.com/files/talks/Safety%20in%20an%20Unsafe%20W... (deadlock prevention example starting slide 50) [2]: https://github.com/akonradi/lock-ordering https://github.com/akonradi/lock-ordering [3]: https://github.com/alaric/lock_order https://github.com/alaric/lock_order
- adhamsalama 2y agoThat's a weird thing to say about a language that doesn't have null safety.
- int_19h 2y agoNot to be outdone here, Go introduces multiple null values that are considered distinct, yet they all exhibit the same problem.
- adhamsalama 2y agoI'm still new to Go so I don't know much about this other than empty slices. Can you give me some hints?
- apatheticonion 2y agoBoth have their place but after writing both extensively, I much prefer Rust - despite the pitfalls. My biggest critisim of Rust (in comparison to Go) is the lack of a powerful standard library while Go's standard library is outstanding. I would also like to see standardized interfaces in Rust (like AsyncWrite) and in general the async story could be better - though I appreciate the versatility.