• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    74
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sometimes I think Go was specifically made for Google to dictate its own preferences on the rest of us like some kind of power play. It enforces one single style of programming too much.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      161 year ago

      Is this a hard error? Like it doesn’t compile at all?

      Isn’t there something like #[allow(unused)] in Rust you can put over the declaration?

      • @flame3244
        link
        271 year ago

        Yes it is a hard error and Go does not compile then. You can do _ = foobar to fake variable usage. I think this is okay for testing purposes.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          301 year ago

          I think that’s even worse because it increases the likelihood you’ll forget you faked that variable just for testing

          • @flame3244
            link
            11 year ago

            Worse than not having a unused variable check at all? Dunno, the underscore assignment are very visible for me and stand out on every code read and review.

            • @AeonFelis
              link
              11
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yes, worse, because now if you want to use the underscore assignment to indicate that you really want to discard that variable - it gets confused with underscore assignments that were put there “temporarily” for experimentation purpose.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                91 year ago

                Exactly.

                Say I’m having some issue with a function. I comment out half the function to see if that’s where the weirdness is. Golang says “unused variable, I refuse to compile this dogshit!” I completely fool Golang by just using _ = foo. Yes, I was correct, that’s where the problem was. I rewrite that section of the code, and test it out, things work perfectly. Only now, it turns out I’m not using foo anymore, and Golang has no idea because I so cleverly fooled it with _ = foo.

                Now, something that could be caught by a linter and expressed as a warning is missed by the language police entirely, and may make it into production code.

                Police the code that people put into a repository / share with others. Don’t police the code that people just want to test on their own.

        • @nomadjoanne
          link
          71 year ago

          Ew, that’s awful. Go is not one of my programming languages but I had always held it in high esteem because Ken Thompson and Rob Pike were involved in it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            51 year ago

            That’s the main reason it has had any success. It’s not that it’s a good language, it’s just that it has good references.

          • @flame3244
            link
            11 year ago

            Honestly, it does not happen often that I have a ln unused variable that I want to keep. In my mind it is the same thing when wanting to call a function that does not exists. Also my editor is highlighting error Long before I try to compile, so this is fine too for me.

        • @AstridWipenaugh
          link
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The underscore is used in production code too. It’s a legitimate way to tell the compiler to discard the object because you don’t intend to use the pointer/value.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        10
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Never really coded in Go outside of trying it out, but as far as I know it’s a hard error.

    • @flame3244
      link
      81 year ago

      I think this is a good thing. The styles are just opinions anyway and forcing everyone to just follow a single style takes a lot of bikeshedding away, which I really like.