Every story and comment from the Hacker News API, in a layout borrowed from 2001.
A comment on How Go improves expressiveness without sacrificing performance. Parent comment
However, its true, I also don't like the :=, or []type syntax purely for aesthetic reasons, but I can see at least the reasoning for it.
As the article points out, the * syntax is oddly non-uniform which it kind of inherits from c. So it's a mixed bag.
Overall though, I find the syntax is less of a problem when you have a big block of go code and you can see it all working together.
It's when you get these little fragments that it looks a bit odd, compared with what you might be use to.
There are no comments on this comment yet.
However, its true, I also don't like the :=, or []type syntax purely for aesthetic reasons, but I can see at least the reasoning for it.
As the article points out, the * syntax is oddly non-uniform which it kind of inherits from c. So it's a mixed bag.
Overall though, I find the syntax is less of a problem when you have a big block of go code and you can see it all working together.
It's when you get these little fragments that it looks a bit odd, compared with what you might be use to.