Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by frikk on Monday March 02, 2015 @08:48PM (#9135655)

I had a recent project that I built with go 1.3. It was a small project ( < 4 weeks ) but it had some interesting requirements -- my app had to be deployed to ARM (raspi), and on an OSX laptop for control, and I use a linux laptop.

The cool part was that it "just worked".

   GOARCH=arm go build myapp.go
   GOOS=darwin go build myapp.go
   go build myapp.go

All three "just worked" with absolutely no surprises, including use of the http engine, json, and a third party serial port library. The native binaries run like a champ.

Looking forward to the continued evolution of golang.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by yoklov on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @12:17AM (#9136228)

> All three "just worked" with absolutely no surprises

Jeez. That's pretty incredible. As someone who absolutely hates dealing with build configuration it's almost tempting enough to take a closer look at go, despite the fact it's garbage collected and I'd never be able to use it (or, if we're being completely honest, want to).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by LBarret on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @05:00AM (#9136946)

Go tooling is excellent. Above anything else IMHO. Sadly the language itself is not so good.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by nothrabannosir on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @06:30AM (#9137145)

This is completely true. "Everything about Go is amazing, except the language."

No snark intended, I say this unironically as someone who uses Go regularly, even for new projects.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by dilap on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @09:34AM (#9137787)

It's a minimilist, practical language that picks a set of features much different than most popular languages today.

I wouldn't pick it for code golf or a programming competitions, but as someone who's been programming for a long time and haa come to value the ability to make clean, simple code that doesn't break (eslecially in weird ways at bad times), I really enjoy Go and think it actually is a really good, if in certain respects unambitious, language.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by bkeroack on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @09:32AM (#9137779)

The language is pretty polarizing--you either "get" and appreciate the design decisions or you find them limiting and archaic.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by nothrabannosir on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @11:16AM (#9138452)

They are the people you hear from. A lot of people are neutral. People who get it, but don't care either way. They don't write opinionated blog posts every Sunday to lament or idolize the newest feature in Go.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by jawr on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @09:43AM (#9137834)

Indeed, although I feel like there isn't enough of a language to hate. It's so simple and yet packs such a punch when combined with the tooling and stdlib.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by frikk on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @12:29PM (#9139034)

I'm an old python hacker, and while I appreciate C/C++ the most I've done with them is set up bridges with ctypes so I can call compiled libraries from python.

Go, to me, feels like it has some of the expressiveness and discoverability of python, with the added bonus of type safety and raw performance of C (for my purposes, at least). For most of my small projects, it fits a nice niche. Any time I need a lightweight HTTP/JSON API to talk with a fancy javascript frontend, Go is slowly becoming my tool of choice -- especially if it may end up on other platforms (including Windows).

When I wanted to learn Go I set aside a Saturday to grok the docs and "getting started" guide, and was surprised to find I finished by 10am (including a coffee break). The language itself is very small, and I found myself successfully "guessing" at structs and function signatures very early.

It's at least worth exploring, especially given the tooling for web, opengl, and android.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by mentat on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @01:44PM (#9139672)

What frameworks / microframeworks are you using for the APIs?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Cross compilation just got better in Go 1.5 by frikk on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @12:32PM (#9139068)

It's worth mentioning that I fully expect it to "just work" on windows as well (judging by past testing experience). The only caveat in this particular case is I'm not sure how or if my third party serial port library has been tested on Windows. I'd expect it to run just fine but need tweaking to find the correct handle for the serial port since it won't be as easy as opening "/dev/tty.x"

[ Parent | on HN ]