# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
#
# Usage:
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users View list of users and latest twt date.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt View all twts.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri View all mentions for uri.
# https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash View all twts for a conversation subject.
#
# Options:
# uri Filter to show a specific users twts.
# offset Start index for quey.
# limit Count of items to return (going back in time).
#
# twt range = 1 14
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/jz6y7sa
@prologic Hahaha, how funny/ironic that the original article complains about crazy dependency chains in Golang! 🤣
@prologic Hahaha, how funny/ironic that the original article complains about crazy dependency chains in Golang! 🤣
@prologic Hahaha, how funny/ironic that the original article complains about crazy dependency chains in Golang! 🤣
@prologic @movq The original article is heaps better than the response I have to say. Very interesting and I agree. Some things in Go are just half-assed.
The dependency hell is one major pain which got me again today. I wanted to find out why or how a certain dependency got pulled in, so I parsed the go mod graph output and filtered for just that dependency branch in question. Turns out, that there are many branches and all but one don't even track back to the main software itself. What the hell? Where are the other dependencies (sometimes only differing in version) coming from? It doesn't make any sense to me at all. They look like they got pulled out of thin air. Need to research further tomorrow.
@lyse I completely agree. The "response" came across as something someone wanted to quickly write to post it somewhere for those 15 minutes of fame. The substance is on the original article.
As poorly written as the response was, I agree. The reason I share it and found the eyele interesting was because of the aspect of the history of the two languages why they were developed and how they have different goals.
As poorly written as the response was, I agree. The reason I share it and found the eyele interesting was because of the aspect of the history of the two languages why they were developed and how they have different goals.
@prologic Yeah, it’s important to keep that in mind. We often wonder why things are the way they are – when all we needed was a little bit of context and history. 👌
The original article – while being a rant – highlights one aspect that I like the most about Rust: They at least *try* to be correct. Instead of going down the route of “meh, it’s probably fine”, the Rust guys confront you with error cases and corner cases and all that. Nobody is perfect, but they at least *try*.
This is something that I miss a lot. I’ve spent way too much time with scripting and that “90% is good enough” rule. Maybe this is just a phase, maybe I’ll grow out of it. 🤣 But at the moment, that focus on correctness is very refreshing.
@prologic Yeah, it’s important to keep that in mind. We often wonder why things are the way they are – when all we needed was a little bit of context and history. 👌
The original article – while being a rant – highlights one aspect that I like the most about Rust: They at least *try* to be correct. Instead of going down the route of “meh, it’s probably fine”, the Rust guys confront you with error cases and corner cases and all that. Nobody is perfect, but they at least *try*.
This is something that I miss a lot. I’ve spent way too much time with scripting and that “90% is good enough” rule. Maybe this is just a phase, maybe I’ll grow out of it. 🤣 But at the moment, that focus on correctness is very refreshing.
@prologic Yeah, it’s important to keep that in mind. We often wonder why things are the way they are – when all we needed was a little bit of context and history. 👌
The original article – while being a rant – highlights one aspect that I like the most about Rust: They at least *try* to be correct. Instead of going down the route of “meh, it’s probably fine”, the Rust guys confront you with error cases and corner cases and all that. Nobody is perfect, but they at least *try*.
This is something that I miss a lot. I’ve spent way too much time with scripting and that “90% is good enough” rule. Maybe this is just a phase, maybe I’ll grow out of it. 🤣 But at the moment, that focus on correctness is very refreshing.
@movq I think the thing about Go here specifically is, it tries to be quite portable at the cost of that "correctness" you point out 🤔
@movq I think the thing about Go here specifically is, it tries to be quite portable at the cost of that "correctness" you point out 🤔