rsc

26 ms·

211.
by rsc 11y ago
FWIW, I'm sorry you see the code of conduct as an attempt to impose rules to protect "my" or "our" current position. It is very much an attempt to bring as many new people as possible into the Go community, not to e
212.
by rsc 11y ago
Written in Go. :-)
213.
by rsc 11y ago
I'm sorry for that, but can you elaborate? If something I'm doing bothers people, I'd really like to know what it is so that I can try to address it. Thanks.
214.
by rsc 11y ago
Like I wrote to coldtea below, I try to be as friendly and helpful as possible to everyone who posts to the mailing lists about Go. Obviously that didn't come across in the examples you're referring to, and I apologize for that. I
215.
by rsc 11y ago
Like throwaway999666, I don't believe that knowledge or experience is justification for being unkind. I try to be as kind and friendly and helpful as possible to everyone who asks for help with Go. Obviously that didn't come acros
216.
by rsc 11y ago
Hi. I'm sorry that seemed impatient, dismissive, and (as you say in one of the replies) passive aggressive. I certainly didn't intend it that way. As gohrt and carussell noted, the point was that if you write ~ in a Go program (pe
217.
by rsc 11y ago
Thanks for elaborating. The interpretations you're using are not what came across in the talk. The notes are just notes, so some of the nuance is lost. I'm told there will be videos in two weeks. Design by consensus is different t
218.
by rsc 11y ago
I don't believe anyone from the Go team has said that using interface{} in containers is "the "correct" way to build generic data structures". It is merely one of the ways available today. (The other is to define al
219.
by rsc 11y ago
My understanding is that the videos will be out in two weeks.
220.
by rsc 11y ago
The focus of Go's open source project is making a language that works well for the kind of networked software Google and many other companies write, roughly "cloud software". I am not sure what ecosystem that would skew towar
221.
by rsc 11y ago
OK, let me try again. I read that post as asking about whether Rob's talk helped make proposals from outside Google more successful, not about Google's influence vs others. I directly addressed Google's influence in my openin
222.
by rsc 11y ago
Can I ask why those make you uncomfortable?
223.
by rsc 11y ago
Sourcegraph's live blog is fantastic, but they do miss some nuance. Robert prefaced this by saying twice that you really really should not read too much into this observation about America vs Europe. He just found it interesting that t
224.
by rsc 11y ago
This was actually a direct question and the entire motivation for Andrew's talk, which was to introduce the answer. The skew favors not just Googlers but the Go team at Google, and the answer is that despite asking people to discuss ch
225.
by rsc 11y ago
I can assure we've spent far more time thinking about generics than about vendoring.
226.
by rsc 11y ago
Is the criticism here really that we have declined to express a strong opinion about something we don't know a lot about?
227.
by rsc 11y ago
Yes and no. This is about agreeing on a common file tree layout. It's not the end of the story: there is a separate effort (github.com/kardianos/vendor-spec) about agreeing on a common format for recording where code came fro
228.
by rsc 11y ago
Perhaps that's the point. A self-proclaimed expert in the field should know how to draw or at least read a DFA.
229.
by rsc 11y ago
The concept is ubiquitous. The specific design for each language is different, and what they all seem to have in common is that they require enormous complexity. See the rest of what I wrote.
230.
by rsc 11y ago
I'm sorry, but no: Generics are a technical issue and are not a political one. The Go team is not against generics per se, only against doing things that are not well understood and/or don't work well with Go. There are d
231.
by rsc 11y ago
I don't know what you mean by "guarantee thread-safety". Whether your program is thread-safe is up to you, not Go.
232.
by rsc 11y ago
While this is technically true, it doesn't seem like that helpful a response to say "well you were getting benefits, just not this one". Until now you've had to know to ask for parallelism; it should have been there by d
233.
by rsc 11y ago
Even if there were news, it's certainly off topic for this post.
234.
by rsc 11y ago
Plan 9 is still updated incrementally; there just hasn't been a formal new numbered release. Dropping Dragonfly/386 and OS X 10.6 would be more like dropping the 3rd edition of Plan 9 (except we never supported it).
235.
by rsc 11y ago
If you want to use cgo you still need a C compiler for that. But it's the system C compiler (clang or gcc), not the one we deleted.
236.
by rsc 11y ago
Yes, and thanks to version control that would take, what, maybe a few minutes?
237.
by rsc 11y ago
What's the rationale for not supporting it, given that the work is done and the maintenance burden is minimal?
238.
by rsc 12y ago
http://golang.org/cmd/gc/
239.
by rsc 12y ago
Re command line vs scripts, I am not convinced that the mental overhead of knowing two names for each flag and flipping back and forth when you context switch between the command line and a shell script really makes that much sense. Certain
240.
by rsc 12y ago
The Go flag package has nothing to do with Plan 9. Like Unix, Plan 9 had single-dash single-letter options ONLY. The long option syntax of getopt is a BSD/GNU-ism, not from Unix. The Go flag package's command lines adopt the obser

More ›