jdev - 2019-11-11

Which is the best XMPP library for golang? No abandonware, please. (cross-question with xmpp:golang@conference.samwhited.com?join)

I use mellium.im/xmpp

jonas’ anything good or bad to say about it? :-)

is it like aioxmpp, but in golang?

I also found Jackal, the XMPP server written in Go, which does not seem to use an external XMPP library. Interesting.

debacle, it was the least bad I could find

but they’re all incomplete and rather low-level

debacle: Got some project or looking for XMPP things to package?

Zash I start to get interested in golang. It looks like a pretty boring and not so well-designed language, but I need something to kill Python on a low-RAM system. Development must be easy and cheap, like Python, not difficult and expensive like Rust or Erlang. Maybe I should consider Lua :-)

jonas’ thnx!

I don’t think you’ll achieve a low memory footprint with golang

jonas’ compared to Python?

not sure

Go uses GC right?

but depending on what you’re doing you won’t be happy with the golang libraries I’ve found so far because of lack of features

it does

but also scoping magic to avoid the GC if possible

main concern would be static linking here, footprint-wise

just use node.js instead? :D

jonas’ we would probably use gccgo with dynamic linking. Anyway, as long as libraries are used only once in the system, it doesn't matter, right?

static linking is such a bad idea, that's probably the worst aspect of Go

debacle, yeah, but remember that vanilla go brings the go equivalent of libc and stuff

that’s stuff you’d normally save

dynamic linking is the benefit of the established frameworks

jonas’ the Python ecosystem is very advanced and I feel like a spoiled child when I look at other ecosystems Ge0rG only that node.js is a chemical waste dump, not an ecosystem

debacle: you'd be surprised about who lives in chemical waste dumps.

jonas’ sure, the standard libary itself might be huge

debacle, I agree

(although I do like myself some C++)

golang has been invented out of hate towards C++ :-)

Ge0rG JS developers maybe? (jc isn't around, is he?)

and I recently ported a golang thing I wrote to C++ out of annoyance with golang, because as you said: "pretty boring and not so well-designed language"

jonas’ it's an outsider view of course. I did not even compile my helloworld yet :-)

Go seems like Java levels of Meh to me.

debacle, I did write some golang code: https://github.com/horazont/dragonstash-golang https://github.com/horazont/prometheus-xmpp-blackbox-exporter

ah, yes, prometheus, one of the golang poster children

> not difficult and expensive like Rust or Erlang This is called education - you learn new and sometimes difficult things in order to be more productive later

It's not wrong, though. Both of those are more expensive to learn than most languages.

(Because they try to do something that most languages don't, of course)

Java and Go must be the cheapest then?

Java's probably about the pinacle of cheap to learn, yeah.

I don't find Java simple at all

Erlang is much more simpler, back then I tried to learn both and ended up with Erlang, at least for my task

Who said anything about simple?

cheap to learn, okay

What does that mean

pep.: less time spent learning?

at least as I understand it

Also, that all depends with what you started anyway. I started with OCaml, it took me quite some time to get into python

Probably something something time from being hired to being productive

pep.: I agree, after 5 years of math in the university functional languages are closer to me

zinid What I meant: I assume, that Erlang and Rust are better™ than Go, but companies care about $/h and time to market. Go has cheaper, faster devs and is still good enough for many projects.

debacle: I disagree, but whatever

As in, you can grab kids from school and have them typing Go or Java in no time

Zash, because they've already gone through the process of learning Java, and that took them all their school years?

Is OOP even the go-to paradigm in schools these days?

(small pun intended)

Who knows?

People that are either still in school or are familiar with courses?

Multi-paradigm languages are where it's at

Lua?!

OCaml :-° (even though object is meh in it, and even if imperative is possible it's definitely not for that)

I got punched in the face with waterfall-model-OOP development as late as 2013 in university, soooo...

(that's almost 7 years ago)

guus.der.kinderen, thanks for reminding me

also, I’m pretty sure that they still do the same thing t here

they are very resistant to change

and allegedly have some ties to the proprietary UML stack we were forced to use for every step of the implementation.

hah!

That, I recognize

we had to follow design paradigm that was developed by one of the professors.

... when they wanted our group (there were groups to implement various software projects) to give a presentation about the thing we did the following year, we politely declined via email with a picture of Tux attached.

fun times.

a Norwegian I know that's still in University is learning primarily Java

oh, yeah, of course that was all java

the language of waterfall-oop

the professor was also very proud of being at companies for $reasons aaaaall the time. so good.

Should I be glad I don't know what waterfall is?

You probably know what waterfall is

what pep. says, and if you don’t, yes

waterfall is when you strictly separate phases like "design", "implementation", "testing" in your ... product ... development ... lifecycle.

don’t pin me on the terms

I tried to flush this out of my brain like a waterfall.

Opposite of agile? Or scrum? Whatever those are?

yeah, pretty much that

Zash, yeah that

I only survived that course with mpv --loop=inf The\ Big\ Lebowski.medium

Basically something without a feedback loop

(or too late)

jonas’ you are probably right: golang is not a solution to safe RAM. libgo.so has 37 MiB on our systems. libc.so is 1.3 for comparison. OTOH, a statically linked hello.go executable has "only" 5 MiB. Write in C, write in C, golang's not the answer, write in C.

C++? =)

as far as I'm concerned C++ is like Cobol now, only reason to write it is maintenence of ancient bad systems, no reason to prefer it over Rust if there is an option

moparisthebest, library support is a good reason to use C++

that implies using C++ libraries is good :P

if there are no rust implementations, sure

there’s still no proper fuse thing for rust for example

(and then there’s of course still the extremely toxic rust community.)

jonas’, why toxic? they are funny, Rust Strike Force

there is only Rust exists, resistance is futile

toxic? I had the opposite impression, that they are too hand-holdy

moparisthebest, they’re just like the matrix folks, whenever there’s even a slight mention of a non-rust thing you have the rust brigade up and running and yelling "RIIR RIIR!!!"

without reason

this makes it seem as if the language coudln’t surive without the RIIR brigade...

ah ok you mean the rust advocates, yea that's fair, I meant more the "mission statement" or whatever https://www.rust-lang.org/ "A language empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software." SO EMPOWERING

I don’t care about extra fluff or plush

seems like they need it.

I just mean, personally, I've been through my "hope this runs correctly" (python/js) phase, been through the "hope this doesn't segfault" (C++) phase, and Rust is far far better, again personally :)

I find it actually ends up being faster from "start coding" to "runs and works" than other langs

what languages did you try?

you can try any type-safe language with GC, this will be much more productive than fighting with borrowing or weak refs in cyclic structures

it actually isn't though, my day-job language is Java

hell, yeah, java is safe as fuck, with NPE 😉

that's another point for Rust :) all the other mentioned langs also have NPE right?

I don't remember what I mentioned 😉

but ocaml or haskell don't have NPEs 😉

Rust was initially written in OCaml by the way

relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENqiuLWZNQg&t=1m11s

jonas’, LOL

:D

I'm glad NPE exists, otherwise I would have never listened to this

> fuzzing UTF-8 strings pro-tip: Ⱥ (U+023A) and Ⱦ (U+023E) are the *only* code points to increase in length (2 to 3 bytes) when lowercased.

totally not a dumpster fire

Eh, so?

a > A

deal with it

like if some code naively allocated the same number of bytes to write a lowercase version of a string into, or even tried to do it in-place

there is bound to be C or C++ out there that does this

bad code gonna be bad