5 ms·

Yeah i just see Go as an alternative for web technologies, where Rust is much more system level focused. I could be wrong, but that seems to be the direction I

Yeah i just see Go as an alternative for web technologies, where Rust is much more system level focused. I could be wrong, but that seems to be the direction I see with Rust.

naasking 12y ago
> Yeah i just see Go as an alternative for web technologies I don't see any web technology Go could replace. Not even dynamically typed langauges.
- vec 12y ago
  I'm starting to use Go as an arguably better Node. Very fast, easy (pseudo)concurrency, relatively nice HTTP capabilities in the stdlib. It wouldn't be my first choice for building a full library, but it works well as an internal component in a service oriented architecture or a background worker for a queuing system.
  - sagichmal 12y ago
    Go is very uncontroversially a better Node. It also predates Node.
    - spion 12y ago
      Depends on what you mean by "better". Better language? Not really, if you want types TypeScript is a much better option. With node+typescript+react you can get end-to-end typechecked code with no FFI involved - thats really, really cool. Better concurrency? Oh yeah, definitely. Better core libraries? Yes, by far. Better package ecosystem and management? Definitely not.
      - sagichmal 12y ago
        > Better language? Not really, There is no conceivable universe in which the expression "JavaScript is a better language than Go" evaluates to true.
        kyllo 12y ago
        ...except for in JavaScript itself: ~$ node > "JavaScript is a better language than Go" ? true : false true > "JavaScript" > "Go" true
        spion 12y ago
        Unless/until Go gets generics, I stand by my statement. A horrible type system that severely limits expressiveness is worse than no type system. Even TypeScript's type system is miles ahead compared to the one in Go.
    - general_failure 12y ago
      I doubt it. The node ecosystem is second to none.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - aikah 12y ago
    All the things node is designed to do and it does it at least as fast as Go. We can argue that the Go concurrency model is better.I think nodejs's is good enough,easier to understand and to deploy. If your goal is to write lightweight webservers that do a specific task,nothing beats node in my opinion.
    - e12e 12y ago
      > easier to ... deploy Ehm, really? Tree of javascript, possibly with some compiled libraries easier to deploy than a static binary? I'm not saying node is hard to deploy, but I think maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean here?
- cft 12y ago
  Prime candidate is any highly scalable TCP socket server. Currently, there's no better language for it
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    Erlang? That switch that is routing your phone calls?
    - kasey_junk 12y ago
      Almost certainly not TCP socket based nor built on commodity hardware.
    - coldtea 12y ago
      It hasn't rooted anybody's phone calls for a long time. Even Ericsson doesn't use Erlang based phone routing anymore...
  - rdtsc 12y ago
    Erlang is a better for it. WhatsApp runs their infrastructure on it. Can easily do millions of concurrent TCP connections on a single machine.
- tptacek 12y ago
  We could not have handled the load at Microcorruption, emulating CPU state for thousands of concurrent users, using Ruby --- which remains the front-end language for the site. We could easily have done so in Java, but we'd be in Java's concurrency model, which is much more difficult to reason about.
  - kyllo 12y ago
    So, you did it in Go instead of Java, right? I think this is exactly what people mean when they say Go is more of a replacement for Java than it is a replacement for C++: In the sense that when Ruby and Python become too slow, people normally reach for Java, but now they have Go as an alternative option, with a better concurrency model than Java's.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      We never even considered writing it in Java. We wanted something with the performance characteristics of C, which is what we would have used had we not had Golang.
      - seunosewa 12y ago
        Golang does not have the "performance xteristics of C"!
        tptacek 12y ago
        I must just be crazy.
  - threeseed 12y ago
    There are alternatives to Java's concurrency model whilst still staying on the JVM: http://docs.paralleluniverse.co/quasar/ http://docs.paralleluniverse.co/quasar/

Yeah i just see Go as an alternative for web technologies, where Rust is much more system level focused. I could be wrong, but that seems to be the direction I see with Rust.

naasking 12y ago

> Yeah i just see Go as an alternative for web technologies I don't see any web technology Go could replace. Not even dynamically typed langauges.

vec 12y ago
I'm starting to use Go as an arguably better Node. Very fast, easy (pseudo)concurrency, relatively nice HTTP capabilities in the stdlib. It wouldn't be my first choice for building a full library, but it works well as an internal component in a service oriented architecture or a background worker for a queuing system.
- sagichmal 12y ago
  Go is very uncontroversially a better Node. It also predates Node.
  - spion 12y ago
    Depends on what you mean by "better". Better language? Not really, if you want types TypeScript is a much better option. With node+typescript+react you can get end-to-end typechecked code with no FFI involved - thats really, really cool. Better concurrency? Oh yeah, definitely. Better core libraries? Yes, by far. Better package ecosystem and management? Definitely not.
    - sagichmal 12y ago
      > Better language? Not really, There is no conceivable universe in which the expression "JavaScript is a better language than Go" evaluates to true.
      - kyllo 12y ago
        ...except for in JavaScript itself: ~$ node > "JavaScript is a better language than Go" ? true : false true > "JavaScript" > "Go" true
      - spion 12y ago
        Unless/until Go gets generics, I stand by my statement. A horrible type system that severely limits expressiveness is worse than no type system. Even TypeScript's type system is miles ahead compared to the one in Go.
  - general_failure 12y ago
    I doubt it. The node ecosystem is second to none.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- aikah 12y ago
  All the things node is designed to do and it does it at least as fast as Go. We can argue that the Go concurrency model is better.I think nodejs's is good enough,easier to understand and to deploy. If your goal is to write lightweight webservers that do a specific task,nothing beats node in my opinion.
  - e12e 12y ago
    > easier to ... deploy Ehm, really? Tree of javascript, possibly with some compiled libraries easier to deploy than a static binary? I'm not saying node is hard to deploy, but I think maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean here?
cft 12y ago
Prime candidate is any highly scalable TCP socket server. Currently, there's no better language for it
- pjmlp 12y ago
  Erlang? That switch that is routing your phone calls?
  - kasey_junk 12y ago
    Almost certainly not TCP socket based nor built on commodity hardware.
  - coldtea 12y ago
    It hasn't rooted anybody's phone calls for a long time. Even Ericsson doesn't use Erlang based phone routing anymore...
- rdtsc 12y ago
  Erlang is a better for it. WhatsApp runs their infrastructure on it. Can easily do millions of concurrent TCP connections on a single machine.
tptacek 12y ago
We could not have handled the load at Microcorruption, emulating CPU state for thousands of concurrent users, using Ruby --- which remains the front-end language for the site. We could easily have done so in Java, but we'd be in Java's concurrency model, which is much more difficult to reason about.
- kyllo 12y ago
  So, you did it in Go instead of Java, right? I think this is exactly what people mean when they say Go is more of a replacement for Java than it is a replacement for C++: In the sense that when Ruby and Python become too slow, people normally reach for Java, but now they have Go as an alternative option, with a better concurrency model than Java's.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    We never even considered writing it in Java. We wanted something with the performance characteristics of C, which is what we would have used had we not had Golang.
    - seunosewa 12y ago
      Golang does not have the "performance xteristics of C"!
      - tptacek 12y ago
        I must just be crazy.
- threeseed 12y ago
  There are alternatives to Java's concurrency model whilst still staying on the JVM: http://docs.paralleluniverse.co/quasar/ http://docs.paralleluniverse.co/quasar/