I naively thought it I may as well take a job using Go, as learning a new language is broadening, and some people like it, so lets find out first hand… I knew it was a questionable choice, looking at how Go adoption tailed off a while ago.

Turns out I hate Go. Sure it’s better than C but that’s a very low bar, and C was never a good alternative choice for the use cases I’m encountering. I’m probably suffering from a codebase of bad Go, but holy shit it’s painful. So much silent propagation of errors up the stack so you never know where the origin of the error was. So very much boilerplate to expand simple activities into long unreadable functions. Various Go problems I’ve hit can be ameliorated if you “don’t do it like that”, but in the real world people “do it like that” all the time.

I’m really starting to feel like there are a lot of people in the company I’ve joined who like to keep their world obtuse and convoluted for job security.

floppy drive, hard drive, sechs drive — we got building blocks. Crowd sourcing a joke could work.

Excellent, the punchline is sorted, now we just need the rest of the joke.

Or they avoid the need for that solution by avoiding that problem in the first place?.

I don’t even now how anyone keeps track of them and finds the ones they want. And how can you possibly do that quicker than just going to the page afresh.

Part of working on a project for me is assembling links to important pages. It may be days, weeks or months later that I want to come back and there are the links. And of course, anything generically or regularly useful is just a bookmark as you say.

It really seems like people keep tabs open just to keep a list of useful pages. There are much easier and more effective ways to do that.

deleted by creator

I’m not triggered by any of this. I’m not sure why my thinking the question is inane would count as “being triggered”.

Upvotes does not necessarily mean people agree with OP’s stance.

It should mean they think it’s a useful/interesting question and I think it very much is not. It’s just someone whining that it doesn’t look like something they’re used to and a bunch of very patient people generously leading them through the very basics of the language that’s well covered in many introductory tutorials - as such it makes it all a waste of time and worthy of being buried.

The more time I spend on Lemmy the more depressed I am about its potential.

Stupid, wrong-headed comments get solid upvotes if they also hint at some popular sentiment. I even see comments that are literally unreadable nonsense get solidly upvoted, either by bots or by people who just like the vibe they feel from scanning it and don’t care that it’s gobbledygook. Some content makes me wonder if half of Lemmy is just LLMs barfing back and forth at each other.

Then this post is heavily upvoted, even though it’s nothing more than “the syntax isn’t the same as the other language(s) I have seen, waaaaa!”. Is it just people like to see Go criticized? Because there are actual real issues that could be discussed.

Well on Reddit, programmerhumor was mostly populated by people weirdly proud of how bad they are at their job, so I don’t see how Lemmy was going to be different.

I’ve worked in a few startups, and it always annoys me when people say they don’t have time to do it right. You don’t have time not to do it right - code structure and clarity is needed even as a solo dev, as you say, for future you. Barfing out code on the basis of “it works, so ship it” you’ll be tied up in your own spaghetti in a few months. Hence the traditional clean-sheet rewrite that comes along after 18-24 months that really brings progress to its knees.

Ironically I just left the startup world for a larger more established company and the code is some of the worst I’ve seen in a decade. e.g. core interface definitions without even have a sentence explaining the purpose of required functions. Think “you’re required to provide a function called “performControl()”, but to work out its responsibilities you’re going to have to reverse-engineer the codebase”. Worst of all this unprofessional crap is part of that ground-up 2nd attempt rewrite.

What do you think comments are?

These are arguments talking past each other. Sure 1 useful comment and 9 redundant ones can be better than zero, but comments are not reliable and often get overlooked in code changes and become misleading, sometimes critically misleading. So often the choice is between not enough comments versus many comments that you cannot trust and will sometimes tell you flat-out lies and overall just add to the difficulty of reading the code.

There’s no virtue in the number of comments, high or low. The virtue is in the presence of quality comments. If we try to argue about how many there should be we can talk past each other forever.

But use type annotations everywhere and make sure your code is always checker clean (with checkin or PR CI hooks). And don’t turn off any lint checks through laziness, e.g. docstring checks. Even for a solo dev it’s always worth having everything typed, checker clean, and docstrings (even if they only effectively say “this thing really is what you’d assume”). It all saves time and effort in the long and even medium term.

I’ve worked on serious large scale Python projects and frankly it’s been very pleasant and productive, but only with the above conditions.

I’m just an emacs … enjoyer (…?) and I just don’t understand the post. I’m pretty sure buffers here refer to something different from emacs buffers as they’re completely unrelated to clipboards. Then from a quick scan of the plug-in mentioned it seems to mimic the clipboard ring emacs has had for many decades (always?).

Basically I have no idea what’s going on here.

Even better, master creating fixup and squash commits and maintain logical commits as you work with git rebase -i --autosquash

Well, it’s not modal by default. It is if you want it to be.

Though as a non-embedded dev who has interviewed embedded candidates I like to ask them to talk about the issues around C vs C++ for embedded and the first point 8 out of 10 of them make is C++ is bad because dynamic allocation is bad. And while they could expand to almost sort of make their point make sense, they generally can’t and stumble when I point out it’s just as optional in each.

I’m used to non-software managers thinking knowing a language is knowing how to make software systems, but other programmers? It’s like saying if you know every language now you’re a novelist. Knowing the language is just a basic necessary fundamental from which you can start to learn how to design and create software.

Ubuntu Mono since it was in beta and I heard the designer from Dalton Maag — the typeface design studio commissioned to design it — give a talk about how excited he was to be able to create a comprehensive, carefully thought out, and truly free/libre font.

I’ve never seen another one that I prefer the look of, and now it’s imprinted in my brain. People love to crap on Shuttleworth / Canonical / Ubuntu, but there are a lot of great things they’ve contributed over the years.

Yes, that’s why we use typing, to get better working code more easily. That’s why I use type annotation and enforced checkers in Python. It makes it so much easier and quicker to create good systems of any significance.