NateDad

56 ms·

481.
by NateDad 12y ago
I don't understand your problem with errors versus maps.... they're actually the exact same code pattern: val, ok := m["foo"] if !ok { // handle not found } // good path
482.
by NateDad 12y ago
Can you explain why you don't like languages with batteries included? Isn't it nice to have one JSON parser that you know is quality and that everyone can use? People new to the language don't have to go figure out which of
483.
by NateDad 12y ago
Have you written a web application in Go? It's actually quite nice. And the low memory overhead and self-contained nature of Go binaries means you can easily put multiple applications on the same machine with nothing more than a reve
484.
Why everyone hates Go(npf.io)
22 points by NateDad 12y ago|4 comments
485.
by NateDad 12y ago
And for my thoughts on working there (written a year ago but still true): http://blog.natefinch.com/2013/11/working-at-canonical.html
486.
by NateDad 12y ago
Any reddit workers that want to stay remote are welcome to apply to Canonical - all remote work, no VC's ever, and it's open source - http://www.canonical.com/careers
487.
by NateDad 12y ago
When you said "a small set of features is bad if users cannot efficiently extend the language because the needed features aren't included" I assumed you meant something like operator overloading or macros or compile-time tem
488.
by NateDad 12y ago
There's a difference between adding nouns and verbs, and changing the very structure of the language. If I say "I like to flargle my pofdin in a huffalop" you can still pick out the verb and the nouns, but if I say "#&a
489.
by NateDad 12y ago
Because they're the most commonly used statically typed languages with both type hierarchies and generics?
490.
by NateDad 12y ago
Well, they are using copy and paste, it's just automated. But is Set<int> really better than IntSet? Don't they carry the same information?
491.
by NateDad 12y ago
I must be using a different definition of a type hierarchy.... Don't C# and java both have generics and type heirarchies?
492.
by NateDad 12y ago
Uh, which of those aren't just blatantly obvious? (Totally serious question)
493.
by NateDad 12y ago
Extending the language is exactly what the go authors and most experienced gophers don't want. I shouldn't have to learn your whole DSL / language extension to use or even read your code. Go intentionally disallows this so
494.
by NateDad 12y ago
Oh yeah, and generic lists and maps And built-in testing infrastructure, performance testing, code distribution, linting, code formatting, parsing and AST libraries...
495.
by NateDad 12y ago
Except go has value types and closures and first class functions and implicit interfaces and multiple return values....
496.
by NateDad 12y ago
It's still a vastly simpler language than pretty much any other widely used language out there. Consistency is superseded by pragmatism in the language design.
497.
by NateDad 12y ago
I'm sorry this hadn't generated any conversation here. This is a good story about the problems the rest of the non-technical world faces. The people at my kids' school can't even install a printer.... Hell, sometimes
498.
by NateDad 12y ago
Btw, anyone interested in loggers should check out my log rolling package gopkg.in/natefinch/lumberjack.v2
499.
by NateDad 12y ago
Does this only output to stdout? It would be useful if it took an io.Writer so you could write to a file or something else, too.
500.
by NateDad 12y ago
From a throw away account? That's cute.
501.
by NateDad 12y ago
So you weren't trying to be insulting when you said people that like go want to live the 70's and are happy with java 1.0? Was that a compliment?
502.
by NateDad 12y ago
Not all languages need to have all the features of Haskell or Rust. Just as not All languages need to be dynamically typed. Just because a language is missing your favorite feature(s), doesn't mean it's a bad language. And mayb
503.
by NateDad 12y ago
People in the 70's knew a lot more about programming than you seem to think.
504.
by NateDad 12y ago
I don't want my language to be that complicated. "Powerful" has nothing to do with it.
505.
by NateDad 12y ago
Actually it's not really a big deal. You just put a header at the top that tells people not to hand modify it. Every C# winforms project already did that. The nice thing is that you can diff the newly generated code versus the old cod
506.
by NateDad 12y ago
Go generate is for package authors, at which point you check the results into your repo. Then anyone else can go get your package as a dependency and not need to regenerate that code. So, yes.
507.
by NateDad 12y ago
It's certainly valid that if your Go binary needs a specific version of Mongo out something that it could be useful to wrap that up in a container.... But just installing go in a container so you can build your Go code from scratch whe
508.
by NateDad 12y ago
It's not about generics. It's just a helpful part of the tooling to do some stuff before you compile. Like many projects already do, this just standardizes it.
509.
by NateDad 12y ago
I find this to be somewhat wacky. Go applications are portable by design. There's no dependencies in the first place. As long as your web servers don't clash on ports or directories, you can deploy as many as you want, built with
510.
by NateDad 12y ago
Of course forums tell you what you've already read. What forums have you gone to in the last decade that didn't? Discourse is better because you have more fine grained control - you can have all topics emailed to you, or only one

More ›