• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    You’ll go fmt and you’ll like it. Go has the single easiest to Google name of any programming language. Thou shalt not question golang decisions.

    • fl42v@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      10 months ago

      Go has the single easiest to Google name of any programming language.

      Ackchually Screenshot_20240215-004708_Mull

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        10 months ago

        C is also bad - but I do think .Net takes the cake. I’m willing to give C a pass though since it existed before we had search engines… Go was specifically developed at Google so there’s no excuse.

    • 30p87@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m gonna name some language “``` head -n1 /dev/random | base64 ``” so it’s easy to search

          • 30p87@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            At least it isn’t confused with a certain Java clone by an evil company or ++ version of itself or not acknowledged at all, because it is just named after a single character, like C for example…

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      I ran across an old Stackoverflow question from many years ago where someone asked a question about types and wondered if generics could solve it. There was a very high-minded, lengthy reply that Go does not have generics, because that makes the language small and clean.

      Since then, Go has implemented generics. Because who the hell wants a strongly typed language without generics on this side of 2010?

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I honestly only think generics made it into Go because the designers started getting embarrassed by the solution to nearly every problem being “create an empty interface”.

      • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        on this side of 2010?

        On this side of 1990. I’m not saying C++ did this right, but it embraced the idea that maybe the compiler could do a little more for us. And every time someone fielded a new language with some traction, eventually they added generics or just used duck-typing from the start.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I thought everyone else just did what I do – if there’s a squiggle, take away the squiggle part. If something’s missing, make a blank line and then blindly bounce on the tab key until Copilot fixes it.

      That’s step 1, and if that doesn’t work, step 2 is to actually look at what’s going on and try to fix it.

    • Scrath@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      You bring back my bad memories of having to implement a server program in rust and all my searches ended up with about 1/3 useful results and the rest being hosting options for rust gameservers