Mooby

6 ms·

1.
by Mooby 14y ago
So, when faced with criticism mentioned in the blog post and referred to in a post, instead of thinking about it you mindlessly insult others and say absolutely nothing about what has been said. Who exactly is the troll here?
2.
by Mooby 14y ago
These are not source modules I'm talking about. If it was only necessary to set $GOPATH to point to source modules then everything would be fine. The problem is that go requires that $GOPATH points to a project's source tree to be able to
3.
by Mooby 14y ago
I'm not talking about gc. I'm talking about go. You know, the program which is extensively marketed as the only program which is required to build and run Go programs, and the standard and default way to deal with Go, from installing thir
4.
by Mooby 14y ago
Supporting declaring variables with new(), make and local variable assignment isn't mandated by the need to make the grammar regular. It's simply a braindead idea. Go might have significant improvements over C, but they screwed the pooch o
5.
by Mooby 14y ago
That approach is nice and all if we are dealing with modules which we wish to reuse. If instead we would like to organize our source tree following a deep directory structure, we are forced to screw around with $GOPATH, which is a braindea
6.
by Mooby 14y ago
You started your post by claiming it wasn't true, but you proceeded to say that yes, it is in fact true. As it is stated in the screencast, a programmer needs to add the workspace to $GOPATH to be able to build the source. That means that
7.
by Mooby 14y ago
He forgot to mention how programmers need to add each project directory to $GOPATH to be able to include files stored in project subdirectories. Talk about a braindead idea.