32 ms·

Can someone do this table for Go? I'm just curious to see it.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
FuckGo 12y ago
I don't get the fetishistic behavior towards Golang. I also saw this comment today. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8799363 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8799363 However, what I get even less is how every single person I've seen make a comment related to Go on an article unrelated to Go has been obviously dumb. Seriously, what kind of idiot thinks this question or the one linked above makes sense? No, no one should do this table for Go. Go is not a dynamically typed language. Go does not have type coercion. Go's rules of equality are simple and obvious with the only exceptions being interfaces (equality of the underlying values) and nil (works as you'd expect). Now please quit coding and never say the word Go again. It's a terrible language and you're a terrible person for commenting about it or using it. I swear, I see dumber people using Go than PHP now-a-days; perhaps I should applaud the Go team for being the only group capable of making a language so terrible and yet so popular since PHP4. Go learn a Haskell for greater good or, better yet, learn to delete your account and jump off a bridge so no-one has to suffer your terrible comments ever again.
- smt88 12y ago
  Your conviction and intelligence definitely show from your decision to use a throwaway to reply! Out of curiosity, what should people be using instead of Go? (And don't say Haskell, because surely you're more pragmatic than that.) I'm looking at Elixir now, but Go has a growing community and great concurrency. It seems to me that you perhaps hate any language that encourage or forces OO design, even though almost no one does real, widely-used, functional projects.
  - codygman 12y ago
    > don't say Haskell, because surely you're more pragmatic than that What's that supposed to mean?
    - smt88 12y ago
      For real projects (ones that definitely involve other people and probably involve money in some way), most of your wasted time is not due to the language you're using. Sure, you could be using non-strict JS or PHP and get bogged down because your typos are silently ignored, but lots of IDEs have static analysis and whatnot to prevent that. Any popular language has workarounds for its most time-wasting issues. Where lots of time is actually lost is 1) learning and 2) reinventing the wheel. Imagine, for example, that there's a magical language called AFP (Absolutely Fucking Perfect). It's perfect. Everything you write in it is short, concise, readable, maintainable, and compiles to hyper-efficient code for any number of cores. Unfortunately, AFP is only used by 1,000 people. See the problem here? The time you spend learning is going to be astronomical, because you won't find the tutorials, Stack Overflow questions, books, forum posts, etc. that you find with a popular language. And then, perhaps worse, you don't have many libraries. None of those other 1,000 people were working with REST APIs? That sucks, you have to write a module for that. None of them needed to process images? Same issue. With AFP, you're likely looking at writing 10 times the amount of code that you would in a popular pile of garbage like PHP or JS. Haskell is AFP. It's widely considered to be a great language, but it's just not practical. There's hardly anything built in Haskell out there for you to build your own stuff on. We're now getting into an era where we might have the best of both worlds. Rust seems to be really interesting on that front. I've also seen the same argument for Scala, Go, and Elixir. But Haskell is not one of those frontrunner languages to take over from the slapped-together old guard of Perl, PHP, Python, and JS.
      - codygman 12y ago
        > There's hardly anything built in Haskell out there for you to build your own stuff on. False. How do you come to this conclusion. I agree with your overall point mostly, but it doesn't apply to Haskell.
  - FuckGo 12y ago
    I don't mind OO / java, I like ruby, I'm hoping rust will be the new language worth using. I strongly dislike Go for a variety of reasons, mostly dealing with its anti-OO sentiments actually. It has things like "for x := range myArr" but you can't implement that yourself because you actually can't implement either a single and multiple return or implement an iterator/range. The language is full of crap like that, where the programmer is treated like a baby who shouldn't have any power. Similarly, the language has first class functions, but no functional constructs (map, etc). It doesn't have pattern matching or tuples so multiple-returns feel like a hack. Its error checking is atrocious. It has no version control or package management worth shit; npm, bundler, etc, all have an idea of "I want something less than this version". In golang, it's worse than C even. They encourage go get, aka "pull from master, surely it won't break" or vendoring. At least in C, you have os package managers to do some of this and pkg-config. Go is just a terribly designed language in almost every aspect in my opinion. It isn't functional and sucks at OO. It sucks at low level. It sucks at high level. It sucks at large project. It's okay until you need to implement your own type and realize you're a second class citizen. Hopefully that made sense to you; thanks for asking nicely.
zamalek 12y ago
It would likely just be the diagonal line in the middle, i.e. the === table.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

I don't get the fetishistic behavior towards Golang. I also saw this comment today. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8799363 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8799363 However, what I get even less is how every single person I've seen make a comment related to Go on an article unrelated to Go has been obviously dumb. Seriously, what kind of idiot thinks this question or the one linked above makes sense? No, no one should do this table for Go. Go is not a dynamically typed language. Go does not have type coercion. Go's rules of equality are simple and obvious with the only exceptions being interfaces (equality of the underlying values) and nil (works as you'd expect). Now please quit coding and never say the word Go again. It's a terrible language and you're a terrible person for commenting about it or using it. I swear, I see dumber people using Go than PHP now-a-days; perhaps I should applaud the Go team for being the only group capable of making a language so terrible and yet so popular since PHP4. Go learn a Haskell for greater good or, better yet, learn to delete your account and jump off a bridge so no-one has to suffer your terrible comments ever again.

smt88 12y ago
Your conviction and intelligence definitely show from your decision to use a throwaway to reply! Out of curiosity, what should people be using instead of Go? (And don't say Haskell, because surely you're more pragmatic than that.) I'm looking at Elixir now, but Go has a growing community and great concurrency. It seems to me that you perhaps hate any language that encourage or forces OO design, even though almost no one does real, widely-used, functional projects.
- codygman 12y ago
  > don't say Haskell, because surely you're more pragmatic than that What's that supposed to mean?
  - smt88 12y ago
    For real projects (ones that definitely involve other people and probably involve money in some way), most of your wasted time is not due to the language you're using. Sure, you could be using non-strict JS or PHP and get bogged down because your typos are silently ignored, but lots of IDEs have static analysis and whatnot to prevent that. Any popular language has workarounds for its most time-wasting issues. Where lots of time is actually lost is 1) learning and 2) reinventing the wheel. Imagine, for example, that there's a magical language called AFP (Absolutely Fucking Perfect). It's perfect. Everything you write in it is short, concise, readable, maintainable, and compiles to hyper-efficient code for any number of cores. Unfortunately, AFP is only used by 1,000 people. See the problem here? The time you spend learning is going to be astronomical, because you won't find the tutorials, Stack Overflow questions, books, forum posts, etc. that you find with a popular language. And then, perhaps worse, you don't have many libraries. None of those other 1,000 people were working with REST APIs? That sucks, you have to write a module for that. None of them needed to process images? Same issue. With AFP, you're likely looking at writing 10 times the amount of code that you would in a popular pile of garbage like PHP or JS. Haskell is AFP. It's widely considered to be a great language, but it's just not practical. There's hardly anything built in Haskell out there for you to build your own stuff on. We're now getting into an era where we might have the best of both worlds. Rust seems to be really interesting on that front. I've also seen the same argument for Scala, Go, and Elixir. But Haskell is not one of those frontrunner languages to take over from the slapped-together old guard of Perl, PHP, Python, and JS.
    - codygman 12y ago
      > There's hardly anything built in Haskell out there for you to build your own stuff on. False. How do you come to this conclusion. I agree with your overall point mostly, but it doesn't apply to Haskell.
- FuckGo 12y ago
  I don't mind OO / java, I like ruby, I'm hoping rust will be the new language worth using. I strongly dislike Go for a variety of reasons, mostly dealing with its anti-OO sentiments actually. It has things like "for x := range myArr" but you can't implement that yourself because you actually can't implement either a single and multiple return or implement an iterator/range. The language is full of crap like that, where the programmer is treated like a baby who shouldn't have any power. Similarly, the language has first class functions, but no functional constructs (map, etc). It doesn't have pattern matching or tuples so multiple-returns feel like a hack. Its error checking is atrocious. It has no version control or package management worth shit; npm, bundler, etc, all have an idea of "I want something less than this version". In golang, it's worse than C even. They encourage go get, aka "pull from master, surely it won't break" or vendoring. At least in C, you have os package managers to do some of this and pkg-config. Go is just a terribly designed language in almost every aspect in my opinion. It isn't functional and sucks at OO. It sucks at low level. It sucks at high level. It sucks at large project. It's okay until you need to implement your own type and realize you're a second class citizen. Hopefully that made sense to you; thanks for asking nicely.

zamalek 12y ago

It would likely just be the diagonal line in the middle, i.e. the === table.