51

Re: Application field Golang

lpd> On a place  I would think, as this niche to occupy. You, similar think that the committee is type of gods and they gather on the Olympus. In a reality normal people there work and everyone solves the task, doing it so that to another not to hinder. You too have a possibility to work in committee, in  the Russian working group which is included into C committee ++ is created.

52

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S> Hello, lpd, you wrote: lpd>> the Code on Java in 2-3 times more slowly a C ++. S> It is said that in server-side, after heat-up VM, tearing much less. Under tests a difference all the same in 2-3 times. Other question, what yes, the considerable share of temporal expenses is necessary on a network and database requests. However, speed of networks increases, unlike processors. And in some cases bek-end in full or in part nevertheless it is exacting to high-speed performance, and conjugation Java and a C ++ in one project not so conveniently. Therefore I do not see sense to select between slow, but convenient language, and fast, but inconvenient if for this purpose there are no the basic reasons. It is possible to refine a C ++ then it would replace Java completely. Since losses of 50-70 % of high-speed performance at Java turn out out of the blue.

53

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S> So simplicity is such ambiguous criterion. While tasks are laid down in a niche defined for language by authors, all is good. As soon as cease to be laid down, so simplicity becomes worse than larceny. The niche defined for Go by authors of language, is called "Go - general purpose language" (general-purpose language). I.e., it approaches (at least, according to authors of language) for the decision of any tasks. S> that to simplicity Go remains not clear why people prefer Go with poor indicative abilities to the same D (same  and with GC) or Rust (, safe, but without GC and without C problems ++). Possibly, tasks at people such that as that programming language also is not necessary. Enough simple "glue" for integration of indirect components. And if for these people simplicity is key (i.e. If instead of exceptions or Either+pattern-matchinga, interface {} instead of trait and inheritance, manual defer instead of RAII) to calculate for appearance in Go something more advanced hardly costs. Because programming on Go, I can concentrate on the decision of the task, instead of on  the difficult, elaborate and nontrivial tool.

54

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> I.e., it approaches (at least, according to authors of language) for the decision of any tasks. Well and? Any network services on Go do. Here the same Docker made. Any experimental DB on it do (in individual copies). It is everything, on what language was useful for 7 years of the active public relations from megacorporation? Pzz> because programming on Go, I can concentrate on the decision of the task, instead of on  the difficult, elaborate and nontrivial tool. Here about that and speech. That a) tasks trivial and b) language do not deliver the advanced possibilities (for they will hinder to concentrate on the task).

55

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: Pzz>> Because programming on Go, I can concentrate on the decision of the task, instead of on  the difficult, elaborate and nontrivial tool. S> here about that and speech. That a) tasks trivial and b) language do not deliver the advanced possibilities (for they will hinder to concentrate on the task). Here is how time if tasks trivial there is a place in a head for struggle with

56

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S>... S> It is everything, on what language was useful for 7 years of the active public relations from megacorporation? For the sake of justice I will note that enough considerable quantity commercial and  the code on Go is written. Under stories working in Uber Go - one of the main languages, it proves to be true presence enough uneasy infrastructural components written on Go, which Uber-sheep laid out in opensource: cherami, cadence. In Amazon there are some projects and internal "party" writing on Go. Well and  several people from the companies more small which specified in the abstract about usage Go in internal projects of the company. So it is used. Not as Java, but it is already enough wide. And it me forces to reconsider all the initiating aversion Go and still to try to study this language and approaches to programming on it. === By the way, still the moment with possibility  in Go seemed to the interesting. Can be  partly rescues fathers of Russian democracy? All do not reach hands to try - can in case of competent usage of this are not too necessary there will be templates/dzheneriki?

57

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, A13x, you wrote: S>> It is everything, on what language was useful for 7 years of the active public relations from megacorporation? A> for the sake of justice I will note that enough considerable quantity commercial and  the code on Go is written. A> Under stories working in Uber Go - one of the main languages, it proves to be true presence enough uneasy infrastructural components written on Go, which Uber-sheep laid out in opensource: cherami, cadence. The question was not in, whether is much written on Go or a little. And in what variety of that write on Go. As now a mode on microservices, the active usage Go in this niche at all a surprise.

58

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, A13x, you wrote: A> By the way, still the moment with possibility  in Go seemed to the interesting. Can be  partly rescues fathers of Russian democracy? A> all do not reach hands to try - can in case of competent usage of this are not too necessary there will be templates/dzheneriki? Yes, quite right, . From Nemerle.

59

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> Here is how time if tasks trivial there is a place in a head for struggle with  And it is possible a code sample (problems) which is trivial on Go and causes complexities on a C ++ (either D, or Rust)?

60

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Glory, you wrote: Hello, A13x, you wrote: A>> By the way, still the moment with possibility  in Go seemed to the interesting. Can be  partly rescues fathers of Russian democracy? A>> all do not reach hands to try - can in case of competent usage of this are not too necessary there will be templates/dzheneriki? Yes, quite right, . From Nemerle. And here ? Same quite another thing.NET or I confuse something?

61

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S> Hello, A13x, you wrote: S>>> It is everything, on what language was useful for 7 years of the active public relations from megacorporation? A>>... S> as now a mode on microservices, the active usage Go in this niche at all a surprise. In that case the claim is not clear. If language is very good for this niche (backend) it already enough to consider that language "was useful".

62

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, A13x, you wrote: S>> As now a mode on microservices, the active usage Go in this niche at all a surprise. A> in that case the claim is not clear. If language is very good for this niche (backend) it already enough to consider that language "was useful". It not the claim. It is direct analogy to other languages which in essence tried to be simple. In particular with Pascal and Modula-2. Both were good in due time for the tasks. The first had the development in the form of the Object Pascal and though somehow exists. The second can still somewhere and lives, but to a former demand to it is far.

63

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: Pzz>> Here is how time if tasks trivial there is a place in a head for struggle with  S> And it is possible a code sample (problems) which is trivial on Go and causes complexities on a C ++ (either D, or Rust)? I after all not it told. I told that superfluous complexity of a C ++ hinders, instead of helps, operation. And politely I ignore your hints that I am engaged in moronic operation, therefore I prefer language for morons

64

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S> It not the claim. It is direct analogy to other languages which in essence tried to be simple. In particular with Pascal and Modula-2. Both were good in due time for the tasks. The first had the development in the form of the Object Pascal and though somehow exists. The second can still somewhere and lives, but to a former demand to it is far. The bad analogy. Pascal never existed, as certain uniform language, there was a quantity of implementations incompatible among themselves. And the most popular were commercial and with the closed source codes. As soon as business supporting them died, language died also, it could not be supported. About  I will not express, it somehow passed by me.

65

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: S>> And it is possible a code sample (problems) which is trivial on Go and causes complexities on a C ++ (either D, or Rust)? Pzz> I after all not it told. I told that superfluous complexity of a C ++ hinders, instead of helps, operation. And politely I ignore your hints that I am engaged in moronic operation, therefore I prefer language for morons Well and if it is a question not about hints of "moronic operation", and understanding two things: a) why people appreciate Go and b) in what type tasks people prefer to use Go. On the Internet of full criticism Go (for example, https://github.com/ksimka/go-is-not-good). But not too a lot of the actual information on how Go helps with development. That there were examples from a category: here on a C ++ we write 100500 lines, all works quickly, but the constant support and catching of periodic bugs demands 3x to periods, 2x to salaries of programmers and then still. Same most becomes on Java in 200600 lines, works normally, but guzzles storage and volume Docker grows in 20 times. Same most becomes on Python in 1000 lines, but works in 30 times . And on Go at us 2500 lines, a Docker-image and all it is written to ten megabytes by suntanned guys from the country where very much like to sing and dance. Actually, it would be reasonable to expect that the programmer who uses Go in the operation, can result a similar example ().

66

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S> a) why people appreciate Go and In my opinion, in that posting from the Ration blog on which just you gave the reference, this subject is well uncovered. S> b) in what type tasks people prefer to use Go. In the core in the server. S> on the Internet of full criticism Go (for example, https://github.com/ksimka/go-is-not-good). Yes, this criticism is partly valid, and partly reflects that fact that at people different tastes. S> but not too a lot of the actual information on how Go helps with development. That there were examples from a category: here on a C ++ we write 100500 lines, all works quickly, but the constant support and catching of periodic bugs demands 3x to periods, 2x to salaries of programmers and then still. Same most becomes on Java in 200600 lines, works normally, but guzzles storage and volume Docker grows in 20 times. Same most becomes on Python in 1000 lines, but works in 30 times . And on Go at us 2500 lines, a Docker-image and all it is written to ten megabytes by suntanned guys from the country where very much like to sing and dance. Well probably, such people it is not enough, which wrote at first 100500 lines on a C ++, then rewrote all in Java, and then also on Go. S> Actually, it would be reasonable to expect that the programmer who uses Go in the operation, can result a similar example (. When I write on Si after the code was compiled, was fast tested and have been recognized by suitable, at me it turns out somewhere on the average by one error for 500 lines. On Go at me it turns out time in three less than errors at the same method of development. Plus, for expression of the same thought on Go is required time in two less than code lines. Partly thanks to automatic control of storage (that allows to return on value of a line and structure and not to care of their further destiny after usage), partly because at Go the standard library is richer, partly because language simply more laconic. I.e. personally I benefit in speed of development several times. Also I receive more pleasures from the writing of such code because it is necessary to time to think of the interesting task more, instead of how to achieve from that language that it is necessary to me. Here somehow so.

67

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> When I write on Si after the code was compiled, was fast tested and have been recognized by suitable, at me it turns out somewhere on the average by one error for 500 lines. It became somehow not so clear: in your practice the main comparing between a pure C and Go happens? Or all the same between a C ++ and Go? PS. On remaining points questions will be a bit later.

68

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, A13x, you wrote: A> By the way, still the moment with possibility  in Go seemed to the interesting. Can be  partly rescues fathers of Russian democracy? Text substitution? I.e. the most primitive similarity of templates With ++, but  is independent, with new bugs and crutches? Yes, certainly. A> All do not reach hands to try - can in case of competent usage of this are not too necessary there will be templates/dzheneriki? Here so there looks state of the art:

69

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S> it is probable, tasks at people such that as that programming language and is not necessary. Enough simple "glue" for integration of indirect components. It is not assured about glue, at Go long since was very brake FFI, paternal in community it was accepted not to use  library, and to rewrite all on Go. Now FFI like made faster, but the tradition remained. But in the core the standard library there shoots - in it for microservices all core already is, sit to itself only to the logician drank.

70

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Masterspline, you wrote: M> Generally, Rust - language for fans of puzzles, so, not for commercial development. Even Mozillovtsy write-write many years, but cannot rewrite on it a small part in any way the operating project which and is successfully written for a long time on so hated C ++. They  let out Firefox Quantum where transferred any parts on Raste, it is already possible to feel, delivering Nightly the version. And so, it really fire, it so visually faster, more smoothly also is more sympathetic some chrome (on which I many years stayed), I have been amazed, even passed on Nightly, though engine JS there more slowly. I do not know, put only in the changed architecture, or Rast so tore With ++, but a difference impressing.

71

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, D. Mon, you wrote: S>> it is probable, tasks at people such that as that programming language and is not necessary. Enough simple "glue" for integration of indirect components. DM> it is not assured about glue, at Go long since was very brake FFI, paternal in community it was accepted not to use  library, and to rewrite all on Go. Now FFI like made faster, but the tradition remained. But in the core the standard library there shoots - in it for microservices all core already is, sit to itself only to the logician drank. "Glue" was understood not as a patching of different libraries in one  a file, and, more likely, transmission of requests from one subsystem in another by means of any RESTful API or something similar.

72

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: S>> a) why people appreciate Go and Pzz> In my opinion, in that posting from the Ration blog on which just you gave the reference, this subject is well uncovered. There the personal judgement of the Ration is described. Not the fact that it is divided even by those who uses Go in operation. S>> b) in what type tasks people prefer to use Go. Pzz> In the core in the server. But what it for tasks? The analog nginx? The analog Kafka? Or it something from area "to accept request, to transform to other representation, to give to other subsystem"? Pzz> Well probably, such people it is not enough, which wrote at first 100500 lines on a C ++, then rewrote all in Java, and then also on Go. But after all Go for operation by any criteria select. For certain compare on something. You, for example, as decided Go to use in ?

73

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: S>>> a) why people appreciate Go and Pzz>> In my opinion, in that posting from the Ration blog on which just you gave the reference, this subject is well uncovered. It is divided by me. But Pajk - much best writer, than I, therefore let is better he speaks. Pzz>> in the core in the server. S> but what it for tasks? The analog nginx? The analog Kafka? Or it something from area "to accept request, to transform to other representation, to give to other subsystem"? Both that and that. Here, for example, a Web server entirely written on Go. Very convenient in usage. It new enough, therefore to me yet was not possible to find in article Internet "as we replaced the apache on  on our site with semibillion users, and learned a zen/wallowed in misfortunes". Or, for example, https://letsencrypt.org/- their economy, as far as I understand, too is written on Go. Google states that in their internal economy there are millions the lines written in this language. I.e., serious projects on it are written. Pzz>> well probably, such people it is not enough, which wrote at first 100500 lines on a C ++, then rewrote all in Java, and then also on Go. S> But after all Go for operation by any criteria select. For certain compare on something. You, for example, as decided Go to use in ? Well, I now in itself, therefore to make such decision to me it was not difficult. At me difficult enough network project consisting of a small site, a certain server economy and  which works on the user computer. I solved, as experiment, to study a modern language. Thus the user economy should work on  and  right now, a poppy and mobile devices - in plans of a different level of remoteness. The server economy works on . The server economy is supposed , and user should not guzzle all processor or all storage at normal loading, i.e. efficiency matters. I selected between , go,  and , on D too looked.  was very crude at the moment of a choice, and I do not believe that Mozilla squeezes out from itself language-long-liver. Destiny D very much is not clear. It is language which becomes per customer, and competes to a C ++ and C# on their own field. I think, it does not survive, there is no sense  with its learning. Learning , unconditionally, is very useful for a head, but language in which lines are represented by the linked list 32-bit  characters not seems to me very practical. At  too poor libraries. In general, decided to try Go. It was pleasant to me.

74

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, so5team, you wrote: Pzz>> When I write on Si after the code was compiled, was fast tested and have been recognized by suitable, at me it turns out somewhere on the average by one error for 500 lines. S> it became somehow not so clear: in your practice the main comparing between a pure C and Go happens? Or all the same between a C ++ and Go? With a pure C.

75

Re: Application field Golang

Hello, D. Mon, you wrote: DM> They  let out Firefox Quantum where transferred any parts on Raste, it is already possible to feel, delivering Nightly the version. And so, it really fire, it so visually faster, more smoothly also is more sympathetic some chrome (on which I many years stayed), I have been amazed, even passed on Nightly, though engine JS there more slowly. I do not know, put only in the changed architecture, or Rast so tore With ++, but a difference impressing. In architecture, certainly. I can check that  will be faster c ++ on 10-15 %, but not several times (if to compare the qualitative code on  to the qualitative code on a C ++, instead of the good code in one language with the bad code on other).