dsymonds

Your code is tripping over a complexity of closures, not directly loops. I don't think you can write a straightforward loop that has confusing behaviour without also using closures. Your "but nothing too complicated" underplays that.

The copyright for Go has been

  Copyright YYYY The Go Authors.

ever since its public release in 2009. Google only holds the copyrights for the subset of contributions to Go made by Google employees, but there's no Google credit in the sense you're describing.

That's the artist's fault, not Patreon. I've sponsored some artists on Patreon at $1/mo.

I don't think it's a transaction cost issue; Patreon charges my credit card once per month (aggregating multiple $1-3/mo charges into a single charge), and I believe they pay the artists once per month too (aggregating hundreds or thousands of contributions).

The original question was about why C extensions are not supported by Go. It's not a matter of performance; it's a matter of correctness.

Segmented stacks in Go went away in Go 1.3 (https://golang.org/doc/go1.3#stacks; June 2014).

The alternate stack structure is indeed one issue. The bigger one is the GC, though; the Go runtime needs to know which pointers it is responsible for freeing, and which are the responsibility of the C code.

I've seen what happens when humans have control of cars. It's not pretty.

I was referring to the Go font, not Go itself; I thought that's what you were referring to.

Google isn't behind it. Some Google employees who work on Go are behind it (well, and Chuck Bigelow too).

But as keeps getting said: it's about the licensing.

It's about Russian spies working on Wall Street, and them being busted by the FBI.

Nothing to do with LinkedIn as far as I can see.

Actually instead they tint the traffic light colours to make them distinguishable to colour blind folk.

It's actually really uncommon to be completely unable to see colour; mostly it is just a problem to be able to distinguish colours.

I don't think it has actually been "tested" in the true sense here. I believe every known case has either been settled out of court (so the court hasn't even had a chance to adjudicate), or has been decided based on some other technicality (like unclear authorship/ownership of the original).

Apart from trivial or throwaway projects, code is read many more times than it is written. Spending time reworking some code to make it easier to read will pay off over the long term.

(There's the question of whether making code more compact but more "clever" truly makes it easier to read, but that's a separate point.)

Go's defererence operator `*` is prefix, like in C.

The point here is that type declarations are regular to read, and those tend to be the tricky ones. Expressions tend not to be so difficult, and are more commonly factored if they become complex. For various reason, type declarations are not so practically factorable.

The standard regexp package, unlike PCRE, is actually a proper regular expression parser/matcher. Anything doing backtracking is at risk of exponential blowup and isn't safe.

https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/regexp1.html

Okay, how do you find a string of N 1's in a very long bit pattern? What's the space and time complexity of your solution? (hint: you can do a lot better)

It only works when you already have access to see the other people's calendars (and hints at this with "Designed specifically for organizations where sharing your calendar with colleagues is the norm").

Try having actual time ranges, not just slots, and you need to find, say, a 30m contiguous block of time.

Nobody is "struggling" with debugging Go programs in the way you were implying. You seemed to be deliberately trying to antagonise, disguising it behind "Interesting, ...".

No need to troll. GDB has worked (to a limited degree) on Go binaries for years, but has never really understood some of its features; Delve is a newer debugger that's specifically targeted to Go.

It isn't a new stance either. For years people have been posting their ideas for Go generics to golang-nuts, and the questions inevitably lead to asking how they'd implement it, how it would interact with interfaces, and so on. Most of the time the proposer hadn't thought it all the way through in those regards. The point of publishing these proposals is to help speed up that process: now the first response can be to point at these and ask for a similar level of thoroughness.

It's not so much "let's all talk about it", but "here's how detailed a proposal needs to be to make it worth considering".

Google and GCP run on the same infrastructure, but this was a GCP problem, not a problem with that common infrastructure.

This is for a "pull request", namely an individual logical change. Your two points don't apply. If you're dealing with whole branches with multiple developers, stick with merging, but this isn't that.

The SSA changes are not in Go 1.6. They're expected to be in Go 1.7.

There's nothing specified that setting a value won't cause a map rebalance or rehash. The implementation is allowed to change things under the hood.

Large scale distributed systems aren't that simple. I don't know any internal details of Twitter, but from what I've gathered they are trying to hit the kind of QoS you are dismissing. Imagine some celebrity with millions of followers says something controversial: it would be confusing to a lot of people if they start getting retweets or discussions of that tweet significantly before they see that tweet themselves. And that's just one scenario.

I don't know about the 500 vs. 1000 employee question, but Twitter is a big engineering challenge.

What license did you give Waze for using your code? Your repo (I'm guessing https://github.com/robterrell/TVOutManager?) doesn't mention the license, so Waze either shouldn't be using it, or you've specified some license to them directly. Did you pick a license with an attribution-required clause?

None of the particular examples you link to are somehow impossible to occur in existing "legal" taxis. Anecdotally, Uber cars are safer in those regards than taxis, despite regulation there.

There's also a Go port of S2: http://godoc.org/github.com/golang/geo/s2

No, goroutines are never cleaned up until they exit. If they are blocked on a channel that no-one else references then they'll be blocked forever.