3 ms·
It's a meta point but the semantic of `go get` is so beautiful I'm profoundly disappointed that the tool isn't usable. Being able to dispatch a co-routine with
by thruflo 11y ago
It's a meta point but the semantic of `go get` is so beautiful I'm profoundly disappointed that the tool isn't usable.
Being able to dispatch a co-routine with `go ...` is beautiful. Being able to fetch a dependency with `go get` is just as succinct and expressive.
I'm not up on Go language development but imho the world would be a better place if they could fix the behaviour to preserve the syntax!
- rhodysurf 11y agoIt isnt usable? Thats really an overstatement.
- brudgers 11y ago"go get" is verbose. GOTO is shorter and considerably harmful. Its subtle beauty was even defended by Knuth.
- TheDong 11y agoWhy is the semantic of `go get` any better than `bundle install`? There's obviously no way they can fix the behavior in a backwards compatible way because it is so fundamentally broken, and I think that doing something because of a pretty name is absolutely ridiculous when it comes to creating a technical product. You need names like 'heartbleed' if you want to talk to management, but go get is a fundamentally developer focused tool and thus its utility should come over its naming. I almost see its naming as a bad rap against google developers because it's an un-googleable phrase and who cares if it sounds pretty if it's un-googleable and also utterly terrible.