On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 04:52:34PM +0200, Lucio De Re wrote: > > Or are you oriented towards kiloLOCs of test code to see which > features are implemented and provide compatability a la autoconf? >
Excellent example of a false dilemma. I'm oriented towards exerting the effort to make something that isn't shitty. I'm at peace with the go developers decision to avoid that effort. Are you? Anyway, bash uses autoconf as well. So all you've done is push the mess one step farther away from your code. Why not just cut the cord? I'm hearing "shell scripting is easy" and I'm hearing "acceptance testing is too hard." Which is it? I can write portable shell scripts, but the idiots on golang-nuts have explicitly said they don't WANT portable shell scripts. They want to rely on bash, and all the GNU bullshit that brings with it.
