Hacker News Reader

Comment by theshrike79 | Hacker News Reader

It still won't beat the deployment speed of

   scp executable user@host:direc/tory/

that you get with Go.

I still use python for stuff that never leaves my computer, but in most cases if I know I need to run it on Someone Else's Machine (or even a server of mine) I'll reach for Go instead.

View on HN

At the expense of absolutely massive, gargantuan, entire-OS-sized binaries.

Just looking at my bin/ folder eg

    k9salpha - a relatively simple curses app - 56MB
    argocd - a cli for magaging argocd - 155MB

It's like what, $0.01 per GB these days? I bought a 2 TB NVMe for Linux 4 years ago, on which I also game, and it's 50% full.

Disk space hasn't been a serious concern in two decades.

Until you start paying for it on cloud deployments per GB transfer.

        strip --strip-all k9salpha argocd

I agree with you, though if you live in a Linux+podman world, you can literally scp whole containers, so at least we made some progress.

Sure but that's not going to work across platforms, right? So not really an apples to apples comparison.

Even the most ardent of Go-haters have to be fair and admit it makes cross-compilation really nice.

    GOOS=linux GOARCH=amd64 go build && scp executable user@host:direc/tory/

Out of the box, no toolchains to manage.

This is pretty much what I do.

I have a Taskfile for local compilation and running (macOS) and when I need to release I can just say `task publish` and it'll cross-compile a Linux binary and copy it to my server.

Sure, it's nice in that regard.

But honestly running poetry install for python is not bad either.

Except in 3 years when poetry is bad for some reason and now there's a new better(?) tool again :D

Like the sibling comment said, cross-compiling is literally setting two environment variables.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com