Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby
by makufiru on Thursday August 04, 2016 @03:42AM
(#12224043)
In my experience, Golang's Windows support is actually fairly poor. I think it is largely to do with the clunky interface that is CGo. I found Rust to be less "warty" by a large margin with good library support in a lot of areas. Your mileage may vary, of course.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
This is not what I experienced so far. I use Golang on both Linux and Windows (50/50) and I didn't have any problems. What are you referring to exactly?
As I said, YMMV but the biggest standout that I remember was trying to play sounds using the windows API. There weren't any packages our team could find that really did it correctly, the one that everyone pointed to leaked memory like crazy and it was hard for us to track down since it relied on bouncing back and forth between C and Go so frequently (making malloc/free lifetimes difficult to follow because C can't know what things have been GC'd by the Go runtime)
Re:Crystal: Fast as C, Slick as Ruby
by rogerdpack on Thursday August 04, 2016 @10:25AM
(#12225716)
sounds more like the ecosystem for windows support is slow. Or were there some stdlib's useful for it in go on linux?
> Golang's Windows support is actually fairly poor.
It does exist unlike Crystal, so you should explain what you mean by poor. I never had a problem compiling a project with CGo on Windows.