4 ms·
It seems the go team chose a method that would produce zero name collisions under parallel development. That's the highest goal, but of course the burden of it
by jjindev 13y ago
It seems the go team chose a method that would produce zero name collisions under parallel development. That's the highest goal, but of course the burden of it is that paths below /src must be kinda long to support it. A "rare collision" solution could have been more concise without being as robust.
- freyr 13y agoA common theme in Go is "Do important things the correct way," even if that equates to slightly more work for the developer. People will inevitably argue about (a) what's really important, and (b) what's really the correct way. But they didn't create Go. It's clear where Go's creator stand on the issues.
- jjindev 13y agoI had a funny experience. Before I ever worked with Go a developer I'd worked with (and argued small details and big philosophies), told me "why don't you use Go? It seems your kind of language." From my later glances it seems like he was right. So I might be in the fortunate subset for which the philosophy matches, more or less.
- dragonwriter 13y ago> It seems the go team chose a method that would produce zero name collisions under parallel development. Well, that and also one which produces a mapping between local paths and repository locations so that you don't need much (or any, in most cases) package metadata or a central directory service, creating a decentralized/distributed package management system. > That's the highest goal, but of course the burden of it is that paths below /src must be kinda long to support it. I suppose, but I'm not sure long paths is really all that big of a burden.