enneff

58 ms·

691.
by enneff 10y ago
But Go doesn't perform abysmally. The 1.5 GC is technically excellent (ask an expert). Go does target "most users". That's the demographic. There will always be edge cases for which the general design does not work.
692.
by enneff 10y ago
FWIW that "regression" looks like a program that depends on particular runtime characteristics to generate "artistic" output. Not really the kind of issue you can realistically develop around. In almost all practical pro
693.
by enneff 10y ago
Ultimately it's not solving anything, because even with some faking it's still not the audio the performer wants to hear. And, besides, gap-free audio software is a solved problem. The article explains how to do it.
694.
by enneff 10y ago
That's not how sound works. Think of a vibrating object. If it stops vibrating suddenly, slowly moving it to its center point isn't going to make the absence of vibration any less jarring.
695.
by enneff 10y ago
Channels are implemented using locks, but "4x slower" is a meaningless microbenchmark number.
696.
by enneff 10y ago
bradfitz created that graph from his subjective experience, and he was talking about the state of things in 2009. FWIW, here's the Go project lead congratulating Rust on their recent birthday: https://twitter.com/_rsc&#
697.
by enneff 10y ago
Well, I'm Australian hence the confusion :-)
698.
by enneff 10y ago
"explotive" isn't a word and that's not an argument.
699.
by enneff 10y ago
You have cause and effect backwards. Puritanical religious movements drove it underground which made it more hazardous that it need be.
700.
by enneff 10y ago
Citation?
701.
by enneff 10y ago
I'd like to note that all the issues you encountered are because newer versions of Go have exposed issues in your application code and dependencies (with the possible exception of the new cgo pointer passing restrictions).
702.
by enneff 10y ago
https://golang.org/doc/go1compat
703.
by enneff 10y ago
It's hard to believe that it would be worth violating your users' trust for some nudes. The internet has enough free racy pictures to last anyone a lifetime.
704.
by enneff 11y ago
> google would rather you move on to GCE anyway... That's not true. We continue to invest heavily in App Engine as a platform.
705.
by enneff 11y ago
> Conclusion? You don't need a map function in go. I don't see Rob making that conclusion anywhere.
706.
by enneff 11y ago
Yes, there are four at the bottom of the doc.
707.
by enneff 11y ago
> Unfortunately, it seems they don't keep older specs around(!) https://github.com/golang/go/commits/master/doc/go_spec.html
708.
by enneff 11y ago
> Go's language spec is a much fuzzier document targeted towards language users — much like e.g. Python's language reference — there is no way you can write a clean-slate implementation just from the language spec. That's
709.
by enneff 11y ago
This thread is about sort interface implementations. Their general form will never change, and the only specifics unique to any given copy are those specific to their type. It is obvious to any Go programmer what can and cannot be changed i
710.
by enneff 11y ago
Will keep that in mind. Thanks!
711.
by enneff 11y ago
That's precisely it. We don't want to "bolt on" any feature to Go. The features should interact nicely. Language design is all about tradeoffs like this. There's a lot of information out there about Go's design
712.
by enneff 11y ago
Or, y'know, just copy and paste the trivial code. It should take all of 30 seconds. Not saying that it's pretty, but it's quick and easy.
713.
by enneff 11y ago
There is nothing political about it, and speaking as someone on the inside it is simply ridiculous to think of it that way. What these real proposals show is that a lot of sincere effort has been spent by members of the core team writing, r
714.
by enneff 11y ago
I think what's happening here is pcwalton is a language implementer, so when you talk about 'conceptual complexity' he thinks about how the feature is specified, whereas you or I think about how the users of the feature think
715.
by enneff 11y ago
As you probably already know, panic/recover/defer are not supposed to be used in the same way as try/catch/finally. They're different features for different purposes. If you want error handling in Go, use error valu
716.
by enneff 11y ago
Your comment does a great disservice to Robert Griesemer, Ken Thompson, and the many others who contributed to Go's design.
717.
[security] Go 1.6.1 and 1.5.4 are released(groups.google.com)
4 points by enneff 11y ago|0 comments
718.
by enneff 11y ago
> I still feel like you could allow execution of functions passed in the data argument I don't recally anyone asking for this before. File an issue? https://golang.org/issue/new > It's stuff like that w
719.
by enneff 11y ago
I also learned to properly program using Turbo Pascal. You might enjoy Go. I find its small language, library, and tools that I can keep in my head leave me feeling similar to how I felt using Turbo Pascal back in the day.
720.
by enneff 11y ago
> And templating is more of a PoC for coroutines in Go than a properly fleshed out library. I worked with Rob on that library and that's really not the case. It was designed from the ground up to replace the existing template librar

More ›