4 ms·

What's the language you're thinking of that has more of these decisions fixed in the standard library? I know it's not Ruby, Python, Rust, or Javascript. Is it

by tptacek 8mo ago

What's the language you're thinking of that has more of these decisions fixed in the standard library? I know it's not Ruby, Python, Rust, or Javascript. Is it Java? I don't think this is something Elixir does better.

harrall 8mo ago
Obviously PHP
JimDabell 8mo ago
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding, but the linked issue seems to address this directly: > Would like to point out how Go is rather the exception than the norm with regards to including UUID support in its standard library. > C#: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.guid.newguid?view=net-7.0&redirectedfrom=MSDN#System_Guid_NewGuid https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.guid.new... > Java: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/UUID.html https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/UUID.htm... > JavaScript: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Crypto/randomUUID https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Crypto/rand... > Python: https://docs.python.org/3/library/uuid.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/uuid.html > Ruby: https://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-1.9.3/libdoc/securerandom/rdoc/SecureRandom.html#method-c-uuid https://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-1.9.3/libdoc/securerandom/rdoc/S...
- throwaway894345 8mo ago
  No one is debating whether Go is missing a uuid package from its standard library; the debate is about whether this is indicative of a general trend with the Go standard library (as the gp claimed above). If you’re arguing as the grandparent did that Go regularly omits important packages from its standard library, then it’s not unreasonable to ask you for your idea of an exemplary stdlib.
  - thayne 8mo ago
    I think the closest thing to an exemplary stdlin is rust's std. I think it strikes a good balance between being too small or too big. Unfortunately, what rust doesn't really have (yet) is a "blessed" set of libraries to supplement the stdlib. The problems with a big "batteries included" standard library like go or python strives for, are that you will inevitably leave things out that at least some people consider "basic", like uuid, and parts of stdlib will probably have lower quality than third party libraries, like pythons urllib or gos log package, and it is constrained by needing to maintain backwards compatibility and being tied to the language's release cycle.
    - throwaway894345 8mo ago
      I didn’t have a strong opinion on standard library sizes until I tried Rust, but Rust was not a very pleasant experience because there were not standard packages or even consistent community advice for things as pervasive as error handling or async. But I understand people have different opinions and that there will never be a standard library that appeases everyone. I don’t think “having a batteries included library” aims to appease everyone either. But mostly I just don’t understand the people who criticize Go for not having enough things in their standard library because Go’s standard library is one of the more useful (which may not be everyone’s ideal).
- tptacek 8mo ago
  You're answering the question of "which languages have UUIDs in their standard libraries" (Javascript is not one of them). That's not the question I'm asking. If you wrote a new Python program today that needed to make HTTP requests, would you rely on the stdlib, or would you pull in a dep? In a Java program, if you were encrypting files or blobs, stdlib or dep? Is C# the language that gives the Go stdlib a run for its money? I haven't used it much. JS, Python, and Ruby, I have, quite a bit, and I have the sprawling requirements.txts and Gemfiles to prove it. I asked the question I did upthread because, while there are a lot of colorable arguments about what Go did wrong, a complete and practical standard library where the standard library's functionality is the idiomatic answer to the problems it addresses is one of the things Go happens to do distinctively well. Which makes dunking on it for this UUID thing kind of odd.
  - gucci-on-fleek 8mo ago
    > If you wrote a new Python program today that needed to make HTTP requests, would you rely on the stdlib, or would you pull in a dep? For a short script, the standard "urllib.request" module [0] works pretty well, and is usually my first choice since it's always installed. For a larger program, I'll usually use a third-party module with more features/async support though, but I'll only do this if I'm using other third-party dependencies anyways. > JS, Python, and Ruby, I have, quite a bit, and I have the sprawling requirements.txts and Gemfiles to prove it. I checked the top 10 Go repositories on GitHub [1], and all but 1 of them have 30+ direct dependencies listed in their "go.mod" files (and many more indirect ones). Also, both C and JavaScript are well-known for their terrible standard libraries, yet out of all languages, JavaScript programs tend to use the most dependencies, while C programs tend to use the least. So I don't think that the number of dependencies that an average program in a given language uses says anything about the quality of that language's standard library. [0]: https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html [1]: https://github.com/trending/go?since=monthly https://github.com/trending/go?since=monthly
    - tptacek 8mo ago
      Just claiming you'd use urllib is a concession. Yeah, I get it: for toy programs, you'd use the stdlib's HTTP. That's not what happens in Golang.
artimaeis 8mo ago
My first, and primary, programming language was C# which includes probably too large a standard library. It was definitely a surprise to see how minimal/simple other standard libraries are!
- jen20 8mo ago
  Like Python though, while the batteries are included, many of them are dead.
  - 0x696C6961 8mo ago
    It begs the question, why don't these languages put out a v2 stdlib?
    - remus 8mo ago
      Broadly speaking, maintaining a big std lib is a huge amount of work, so it makes sense that a language team is conservative about adding new surface to a stb lib which they will then have to maintain for a long time.
      - PunchyHamster 8mo ago
        Why it is "huge amount of work" ? Do the code reliably breaks in every new python version ?
        LtWorf 8mo ago
        Yes, in python they break something at every release now. It's terrible. It mostly is because they remove modules from their standard library for no good reasons. For example they've removed asyncore, their original loop-based module before the async/await syntax existed. All the software from that era needs a total rewrite. Luckily in debian for now the module is provided as a .deb package so I didn't have to do the total rewrite. edit: as usual on ycombinator, dowvotes for saying something factually true that can be easily verified :D

by tptacek 8mo ago

harrall 8mo ago

Obviously PHP

JimDabell 8mo ago

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding, but the linked issue seems to address this directly: > Would like to point out how Go is rather the exception than the norm with regards to including UUID support in its standard library. > C#: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.guid.newguid?view=net-7.0&redirectedfrom=MSDN#System_Guid_NewGuid https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.guid.new... > Java: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/UUID.html https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/UUID.htm... > JavaScript: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Crypto/randomUUID https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Crypto/rand... > Python: https://docs.python.org/3/library/uuid.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/uuid.html > Ruby: https://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-1.9.3/libdoc/securerandom/rdoc/SecureRandom.html#method-c-uuid https://ruby-doc.org/stdlib-1.9.3/libdoc/securerandom/rdoc/S...

throwaway894345 8mo ago
No one is debating whether Go is missing a uuid package from its standard library; the debate is about whether this is indicative of a general trend with the Go standard library (as the gp claimed above). If you’re arguing as the grandparent did that Go regularly omits important packages from its standard library, then it’s not unreasonable to ask you for your idea of an exemplary stdlib.
- thayne 8mo ago
  I think the closest thing to an exemplary stdlin is rust's std. I think it strikes a good balance between being too small or too big. Unfortunately, what rust doesn't really have (yet) is a "blessed" set of libraries to supplement the stdlib. The problems with a big "batteries included" standard library like go or python strives for, are that you will inevitably leave things out that at least some people consider "basic", like uuid, and parts of stdlib will probably have lower quality than third party libraries, like pythons urllib or gos log package, and it is constrained by needing to maintain backwards compatibility and being tied to the language's release cycle.
  - throwaway894345 8mo ago
    I didn’t have a strong opinion on standard library sizes until I tried Rust, but Rust was not a very pleasant experience because there were not standard packages or even consistent community advice for things as pervasive as error handling or async. But I understand people have different opinions and that there will never be a standard library that appeases everyone. I don’t think “having a batteries included library” aims to appease everyone either. But mostly I just don’t understand the people who criticize Go for not having enough things in their standard library because Go’s standard library is one of the more useful (which may not be everyone’s ideal).
tptacek 8mo ago
You're answering the question of "which languages have UUIDs in their standard libraries" (Javascript is not one of them). That's not the question I'm asking. If you wrote a new Python program today that needed to make HTTP requests, would you rely on the stdlib, or would you pull in a dep? In a Java program, if you were encrypting files or blobs, stdlib or dep? Is C# the language that gives the Go stdlib a run for its money? I haven't used it much. JS, Python, and Ruby, I have, quite a bit, and I have the sprawling requirements.txts and Gemfiles to prove it. I asked the question I did upthread because, while there are a lot of colorable arguments about what Go did wrong, a complete and practical standard library where the standard library's functionality is the idiomatic answer to the problems it addresses is one of the things Go happens to do distinctively well. Which makes dunking on it for this UUID thing kind of odd.
- gucci-on-fleek 8mo ago
  > If you wrote a new Python program today that needed to make HTTP requests, would you rely on the stdlib, or would you pull in a dep? For a short script, the standard "urllib.request" module [0] works pretty well, and is usually my first choice since it's always installed. For a larger program, I'll usually use a third-party module with more features/async support though, but I'll only do this if I'm using other third-party dependencies anyways. > JS, Python, and Ruby, I have, quite a bit, and I have the sprawling requirements.txts and Gemfiles to prove it. I checked the top 10 Go repositories on GitHub [1], and all but 1 of them have 30+ direct dependencies listed in their "go.mod" files (and many more indirect ones). Also, both C and JavaScript are well-known for their terrible standard libraries, yet out of all languages, JavaScript programs tend to use the most dependencies, while C programs tend to use the least. So I don't think that the number of dependencies that an average program in a given language uses says anything about the quality of that language's standard library. [0]: https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html https://docs.python.org/3/library/urllib.request.html [1]: https://github.com/trending/go?since=monthly https://github.com/trending/go?since=monthly
  - tptacek 8mo ago
    Just claiming you'd use urllib is a concession. Yeah, I get it: for toy programs, you'd use the stdlib's HTTP. That's not what happens in Golang.

artimaeis 8mo ago

My first, and primary, programming language was C# which includes probably too large a standard library. It was definitely a surprise to see how minimal/simple other standard libraries are!

jen20 8mo ago
Like Python though, while the batteries are included, many of them are dead.
- 0x696C6961 8mo ago
  It begs the question, why don't these languages put out a v2 stdlib?
  - remus 8mo ago
    Broadly speaking, maintaining a big std lib is a huge amount of work, so it makes sense that a language team is conservative about adding new surface to a stb lib which they will then have to maintain for a long time.
    - PunchyHamster 8mo ago
      Why it is "huge amount of work" ? Do the code reliably breaks in every new python version ?
      - LtWorf 8mo ago
        Yes, in python they break something at every release now. It's terrible. It mostly is because they remove modules from their standard library for no good reasons. For example they've removed asyncore, their original loop-based module before the async/await syntax existed. All the software from that era needs a total rewrite. Luckily in debian for now the module is provided as a .deb package so I didn't have to do the total rewrite. edit: as usual on ycombinator, dowvotes for saying something factually true that can be easily verified :D