4 ms·
We tend not to use ORMs, because they're evil. There are various libraries people use for auth, etc. But rolling your own isn't hard - Go has (e.g.) bcrypt in
by marcus_holmes 5mo ago
We tend not to use ORMs, because they're evil.
There are various libraries people use for auth, etc. But rolling your own isn't hard - Go has (e.g.) bcrypt in the standard library, so most of the heavy lifting is already done, you can write a solid auth implementation in <50 lines of code using that.
Generally Go prefers libraries to frameworks. Wrap the hard bits up into a library that can then be used widely in any implementation, rather than rolling it into a one-size-fits-all implementation that doesn't really suit anyone properly.
- p2detar 5mo agoI second that no-ORM statement. I even follow that in Java. Object mapping is fine, but I’ll write my own SQL, rather than debug obscure (to me) HQL queries.
- st3fan 5mo agoplease don’t generalize. there is no “we” .. “we” are all different and i can tell you from experience that there are also many people and teams who use go and prefer ORMs and frameworks and do not build everything from scratch …
- marcus_holmes 5mo agotrue, but there does tend to be a consensus (or has been) in the Go community around a lot of this stuff.
- hota_mazi 5mo ago> We tend not to use ORMs, because they're evil. This is typical Go culture. If it is not readily available in the language or the standard library, it's evil. It's an easy cop out to explain away the gaps in the ecosystem. Not long ago, the Go team was saying that generics are evil for that very same reason.
- the__alchemist 5mo agoRust backend is like this too, albeit softer. The gaps are explained as "Why would I want that/I don't need that" instead of "evil". My GitHub is dominated by rust projects, and I think it's the nicest overall language. But not nice enough to write bespoke solutions for problems that have had robust solutions since before I started programming! There is a basic set of functionality most web apps use, and that hasn't changed in a decade+; I don't want to re-write my own version of this, nor fight compatibility problems from (comparatively) poorly-integrated and documented libs. I am trying to make good decisions, and am weighing "This long-standing solution does everything I need, and is easy to use and well-documented etc" vs "People on the internet are telling me I don't need it, or I can use X rust lib instead". It feels like the "We have McDonald's at home" meme.
- Orygin 5mo agoORMs considered harmful even for other programming languages/ecosystems
- tracker1 5mo agoI think it's contextual... IMO IoC/DI in JavaScript/TypeScript is evil, because there's a built in reference system and it's easy enough to override in testing frameworks already, so IoC/DI has much less real value and is more likely to cause harm than help. I would say that ORMs are often similar, in that depending on the environment and Object Mapper is more than enough for most use cases, again in my opinion.