4 ms·

Same reason most posts about MongoDB for a long time had complaints about Mongo's uh . . . let's say "relaxed" . . . approach to durability. Because proponents

Same reason most posts about MongoDB for a long time had complaints about Mongo's uh . . . let's say "relaxed" . . . approach to durability. Because proponents of the language/system/idea tend to promote an unbalanced view of its quality, its detractors need to be there to give people on the fence the right dose of the bad medicine. Also, speaking only for myself, I really like the language and its ideas, but that one thing it's missing makes it too annoying to write code in it. I'd like to see more people aware of this deficiency and putting pressure on the language's owners to fix that problem, so that I can start using it.

bsg75 13y ago
Go generics and Mongo durability in the same thread. There is a trifecta brewing here...
- sehr 13y ago
  Never underestimate the power of nitpicking in an HN thread.
  - jamesaguilar 13y ago
    It is amusing that you consider either generics or durability to be "nitpicks." One is a feature that is present in almost every static language of at least the last two decades, and another is a fundamental need of most database users, relational or not. Unless by nitpick you mean, "something I personally don't care about," I think your nitpick-classifier is a bit busted.
    - sehr 13y ago
      I don't consider the features (or lack thereof) to be nitpicks. They are valid criticisms, but they have had their own very extensive discussions, and we are all very aware of them. Bringing that into a thread regarding a very cool set of examples regarding the core features of the language, isn't very constructive (at least IMO).
      - jamesaguilar 13y ago
        Ah. I see where our disagreement comes from. I do not believe that everyone is very aware of these issues. I believe go users are, but since this entire thread is evangelistic, there are people here who are not currently go users who are not aware. The exclamations of surprise at my provided example are proof enough of this for my satisfaction.
        justin66 13y ago
        You do realize that people who look at the tutorial will discover the lack of generics on their own, right? And that if they share the "my God, lack of generics is a war crime!" attitude, they're bound to discover it literally right away?
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
        This argument can equally be used to protest the saying of anything good about the language, since obviously people who try the language will discover this good thing quickly if it's useful. This is not a compelling argument to me.
Shamanmuni 13y ago
I tend to think that you and the rest of "Generics or death!" crowd make a disservice to your own cause when you lazily come and repeat the same arguments. The rest gets bored and frustrated. Yeah, we get it, you like generics, it makes sorting stuff easier, and you're repeating the same stuff over and over again for our own good because you are true altruists, etc. Can we get over that? If there's another thread which talks about good and bad points of the Golang design then, by all means, bash the language as much as you like. But if there's something you don't like it doesn't mean you get a free pass to repeat yourself whenever something with Go in the title appears in HN, whatever it is. Context matters, you aren't helping anybody, just trolling.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  I would surely never take these complaints to a go-specific discussion board. That would be disruptive and rude. But this site is not that. I will react to stories on here as pleases me, and it pleases me to constructively criticize certain go design choices sometimes when the subject comes up.
  - Shamanmuni 13y ago
    You don't fool anybody, the subject didn't come up untill you brought it. The thread is about a site that shows examples of Go code and explains them, there's no discussion about the advantages or disadvantages of their design decisions, just matter of fact statements. Of course, you can do whatever you want, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us won't probably look at your comments thinking "Here come the generics whiners again" and look in the other direction. You are alienating your audience with your indiscriminate repetition. And, if the disclaimer helps you, I'd like generics in Go, they are useful sometimes. I just don't see the point in such zealotry over something which is merely convenient.
    - 0xdeadbeefbabe 13y ago
      If only there were a workaround for not having generics, sigh. But seriously, they may not implement generics out of spite or just to troll generics zealots. Edit: remove ambiguity

bsg75 13y ago

Go generics and Mongo durability in the same thread. There is a trifecta brewing here...

sehr 13y ago
Never underestimate the power of nitpicking in an HN thread.
- jamesaguilar 13y ago
  It is amusing that you consider either generics or durability to be "nitpicks." One is a feature that is present in almost every static language of at least the last two decades, and another is a fundamental need of most database users, relational or not. Unless by nitpick you mean, "something I personally don't care about," I think your nitpick-classifier is a bit busted.
  - sehr 13y ago
    I don't consider the features (or lack thereof) to be nitpicks. They are valid criticisms, but they have had their own very extensive discussions, and we are all very aware of them. Bringing that into a thread regarding a very cool set of examples regarding the core features of the language, isn't very constructive (at least IMO).
    - jamesaguilar 13y ago
      Ah. I see where our disagreement comes from. I do not believe that everyone is very aware of these issues. I believe go users are, but since this entire thread is evangelistic, there are people here who are not currently go users who are not aware. The exclamations of surprise at my provided example are proof enough of this for my satisfaction.
      - justin66 13y ago
        You do realize that people who look at the tutorial will discover the lack of generics on their own, right? And that if they share the "my God, lack of generics is a war crime!" attitude, they're bound to discover it literally right away?
        jamesaguilar 13y ago
        This argument can equally be used to protest the saying of anything good about the language, since obviously people who try the language will discover this good thing quickly if it's useful. This is not a compelling argument to me.

Shamanmuni 13y ago

I tend to think that you and the rest of "Generics or death!" crowd make a disservice to your own cause when you lazily come and repeat the same arguments. The rest gets bored and frustrated. Yeah, we get it, you like generics, it makes sorting stuff easier, and you're repeating the same stuff over and over again for our own good because you are true altruists, etc. Can we get over that? If there's another thread which talks about good and bad points of the Golang design then, by all means, bash the language as much as you like. But if there's something you don't like it doesn't mean you get a free pass to repeat yourself whenever something with Go in the title appears in HN, whatever it is. Context matters, you aren't helping anybody, just trolling.

jamesaguilar 13y ago
I would surely never take these complaints to a go-specific discussion board. That would be disruptive and rude. But this site is not that. I will react to stories on here as pleases me, and it pleases me to constructively criticize certain go design choices sometimes when the subject comes up.
- Shamanmuni 13y ago
  You don't fool anybody, the subject didn't come up untill you brought it. The thread is about a site that shows examples of Go code and explains them, there's no discussion about the advantages or disadvantages of their design decisions, just matter of fact statements. Of course, you can do whatever you want, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us won't probably look at your comments thinking "Here come the generics whiners again" and look in the other direction. You are alienating your audience with your indiscriminate repetition. And, if the disclaimer helps you, I'd like generics in Go, they are useful sometimes. I just don't see the point in such zealotry over something which is merely convenient.
  - 0xdeadbeefbabe 13y ago
    If only there were a workaround for not having generics, sigh. But seriously, they may not implement generics out of spite or just to troll generics zealots. Edit: remove ambiguity