|
I just saw this newly released book, Hands-On Software Engineering with Golang: Move beyond basic programming to design and build reliable software with clean code: [^]
Are Go and Golang the same thing?
I looked it up on wikipedia:
Quote: Go (incorrectly known as Golang,[14]) is a statically typed, compiled programming language designed at Google[15] by Robert Griesemer, Rob Pike, and Ken Thompson.[12] Go is syntactically similar to C, but with memory safety, garbage collection, structural typing,[6] and CSP-style concurrency.[16]
So I checked out the reference from the official Go site and look:
official site says: Is the language called Go or Golang?
The language is called Go. The "golang" moniker arose because the web site is golang.org, not go.org, which was not available to us. Many use the golang name, though, and it is handy as a label. For instance, the Twitter tag for the language is "#golang". The language's name is just plain Go, regardless.
I'm glad we straightened this little issue up. 
|
|
|
|
|
At least with golang, you can search for it, and be reasonably sure that you're going to find things about the go languange. Searching for just go, on the other hand ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: I'm glad we straightened this little issue up.
This will make a huge difference to my lifestyle.
I do feel compelled, though, to comment that if the idiots who gave it such a fruggin' stupid name were to have named it better, there wouldn't be any need for them to get pathetically snooty about it.
Maybe I'm getting jaded, but I'm not feeling any surprise that the company that declares itself to be the world's greatest expert in Internet search doesn't have a clue how to give their products names that are searchable.
They might as well have called it "the" or "I".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, if I Google "Go", the first two results are "The Go Programming Language" and "Downloads - The Go Programming Language".
The world's greatest experts in Internet search make sure it's searchable
With Bing and DuckDuckGo it's a little further down, but still on the first page.
Of course those results are all custom made to my profile and I'm a programmer.
|
|
|
|
|
The first result isn't a Wikipedia entry about the oriental board game?!
Indeed, Google must be "tweaking" the results. At least this one is a little more innocuous than their other "tweaks".
|
|
|
|
|
|
In any case, I prefer Google's follow-up - Ogle (or should that be Oglelang?).
|
|
|
|
|
|
And they say they're matchless.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
You'll cause a stink if you do!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do so-called designers think that large areas of blank, white space is a good thing?
Is this a plot by huge, High Definition screen vendors to drive sales? In the good old days the key thing about displaying information on a screen was to provide such information in a compact, readable form with interface fields glaringly obvious (such as text entry,buttons, etc.).
Now it's all about using invisible scrollbars (once you guess where they are and hover over that area long enough) to plough through huge acreages of blank space just to read more than a couple of lines at a time.
In addition, the text is squeezed between huge stock photos that are barely relevant and jump, scroll or wobble around the screen like that old April Fool's code that made dialog box buttons dodge your mouse when you tried to click on them.
..and half the time buttons are just some text you have to know to click upon.
Example: The other day I went to UPS/FedEx/whoever to track a parcel. There was some huge text somewhere in the middle of a large blank area that said "Tracking #" (note the "#" instead of "number", despite the huge surround white space available).
So I tried typing the tracking number - didn't work, I needed to click on the entry field to get focus.
Where is the entry field?
I clicked on the text, nothing happened;
I clicked on the blank area immediately to the right of the text, nothing happened;
I clicked on the blank area immediately below the text, nothing happened... hmmm.
I clicked randomly in various places around the screen and then tried typing, nothing...
...until finally I found that if I clicked below the text about an inch (or a couple of centimeters) below the text and started typing, the number finally appeared! Yay!
There was no flashing cursor, no text entry border or shadowed area, no different shade of grey or colour to give a clue where to type; you just had to click randomly until you found the area that responded. Hovering around to see the cursor change to a text entry cursor didn't work anymore - there was no cursor at all during text entry, the mouse pointer didn't change or even move to follow the entered text. What numpty thought that was a good user interface (sorry, User eXperience)? I'm surprised I didn't have to scroll down to find it! Actually, I would have had to if I was on a smaller screen or not running full-screen.
To sum up: Grrrrr!
Thoughts?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
In theory, usage of space should be to prevent a page from being an eyesore.
In practice, boil-plate website produced by entire corporations of script-kitty's all use the same templates to make an endless supply of look-alike websites with the readily available stock photos.
So what else is new?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don't understand the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
I like the coding one a few images down. The code projected on the dude sitting in front of the screen is readable. That means it's mirrored on the screen. He must be an elite programmer...
|
|
|
|
|
Forogar wrote: There was no flashing cursor, no text entry border or shadowed area, no different shade of grey or colour to give a clue where to type; you just had to click randomly until you found the area that responded
I know it's not a solution to the moronically bad design you rightly complain about, but most pre-made "You. too can build a website for your company, with no training!" templates do automatically assign tab-order values, so you might be able to click on the field label and hit the Tab key, to position the cursor.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
That's an idea I didn't try but would probably have worked.
However, you and I are developers and know these things. Most of the customers are not and would not know this so, once more, a useless UX!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, they've got plenty of space on the page to explain how to do it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Did you get the "how was your experience today?" email from them?
|
|
|
|
|
I agree.
Would a black background be better? (I don't think so.)
|
|
|
|
|
But-but-but it's all about making pages look cleeeeeean, and scrollbars and control edges make everything look too busy.
Whatever. But as far as I'm concerned, a web page and a pamphlet serve different purposes. Don't turn one into the other.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: scrollbars and control edges make everything look too busy
ms says that the scrollbars vanish to allow people to focus on their work (the morons actually use the word "focus").
Everyone else in the world says that they can't focus on their work because the f***ing scrollbars keep vanishing.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
Please do not call or send letters. I know Java And JavaScript are as related as Ham and Hamburgers. 
