I would also question the need for a "full-fledged" framework. The
motivation behind such frameworks is to make development (writing)
easier by either making some choices you otherwise have to make which
would require a deeper understanding of the problem and solution
domains or by deferring those
That is why a senior engineer creates a facade for the specific problem domain.
> On Jun 13, 2020, at 3:29 PM, 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts
> wrote:
>
>
> Maybe a dumb question but: Why would we *need* a standard framework?
>
> We're currently re-working this at my workplace and in the pro
Hello gophers, recently I published go tool and extension for vscode to
help with some common performance transformations for structs, such as:
-
cpu cache alignment
-
memory packing
-
false sharing guarding
-
auto annotation
-
generic fiel
Maybe a dumb question but: Why would we *need* a standard framework?
We're currently re-working this at my workplace and in the process, I've
looked at both go-kit and micro. Ultimately, at least as far as I can tell,
they don't seem to solve any of the problems I'm seeing, though. Both of
them te
Might not be the right place for this discussion but also useful to gauge
the experiences of the community. For the most part Go embodies a standard
library philosophy and most people are opposed to using any full fledged
framework. With Go now being a decade old, I feel as though with that
mat
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 5:37 PM Jake Montgomery wrote:
> You cant really write a short 'end()' function. You have to write an end
> function for every type of slice. Or use reflection, which would make the
> function slow, and not inlined. Generics anyone?
I haven't mentioned anything about th
https://play.golang.org/p/EZEXmBig1y-
On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 9:37:35 AM UTC-6, Jake Montgomery wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 10:55:43 AM UTC-4, Jan Mercl wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'd suggest to just write the short 'end' f
On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 10:55:43 AM UTC-4, Jan Mercl wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli > wrote:
>
> I'd suggest to just write the short 'end' function by yourself if you
> think it's useful for you. It does not harm performance as it will get
> inlined AFAICT.
>
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli wrote:
I'd suggest to just write the short 'end' function by yourself if you
think it's useful for you. It does not harm performance as it will get
inlined AFAICT.
But it IMO hurts readability a bit. I'd prefer to read the explicit
`len(x)-1` instea
tl;dr: Go's "range" operator has eliminated the most common trap where
I make off-by-one errors. The next largest category of off-by-one
errors would be eliminated if there was a way to specify the last item
in an array. It would also improve a developer's ability to convey
intent.
...
I've bee
10 matches
Mail list logo
