Learning Go as a Node.js Developer

https://nemethgergely.com/learning-go-as-a-nodejs-developer/

by skellertor • 8 years ago

82 76 8 years ago

nemethgergely.com

Teeer2• 8 years ago

Oh boy, another learning ___ as a ____ developer blog post.

reificator• 8 years ago

Counterpoint, I wish there were more resources for new languages that assume you already know how to program.

Professional Javascript for Web Developers[1] is a favorite of mine, because it doesn't waste time teaching you to program and teaching you the language. Instead it points out things that will surprise you if you come from C-like languages, and things you need to watch out for.

Now, since I effectively learned to program in C and later C#/Java, ___ for node developers isn't what I'm after, especially if it spends a bunch of time talking about static typing or fixed size arrays and such. But if you're going the opposite way as I did, learning the high level and transitioning to the low level, something like that could be very useful indeed.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Professional-JavaScript-Developers-Ni...

dang• 8 years ago

Could you please not post snarky dismissals to this site? We're trying for better than that here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

Teeer2• 8 years ago

I'm sure you're also trying for better content. I'll continue to embrace my displeasure for posts like these, thank you very much.

ralusek• 8 years ago

Why would this author feel compelled to write an article about this if they're just learning? That asynchronous Go code which is meant to be analogous to the handful of Node lines looks super verbose. Because the author has claimed a lack of expertise, I have no idea if that is actually the correct way to write something like that out...but it certainly doesn't make Go look good.

gouggoug• 8 years ago

Why would this author feel compelled to write an article about this if they're just learning?

Why wouldn't they? They specifically claim lack of expertise, and that sets the expectations for the reader.

The author is just telling their story about learning Go coming from javascript/nodejs. Whether or not you like the book doesn't mean it shouldn't have been written.

tudelo• 8 years ago

Well, what's a quicker way for them to learn? I guarantee if they did something incorrectly people like you will point it out :)

donatj2• 8 years ago

I myself know I learn better when I write things I have learned down. I have written very similar blog posts myself, a couple of which actually ended up on HN.

It’s a really weird experience writing something you figure no one will ever read, and suddenly one day months later having to field mass criticism.

marcus_holmes8• 8 years ago

The biggest difference I see: the author immediately reached for a framework instead of checking out the standard library.

In Node, the standard library is effectively non-existent, so Node devs get trained and acclimatised to dependencies.

In Golang, dependencies are minimised. Everyone tries to stick to the standard library as much as possible. Because the standard library is so good, for most projects this is perfectly reasonable.

I'd say the first thing every Node dev should know when learning Go is that they don't need a dependency manager. If you can't do it with the standard library then you're probably doing it wrong (at least until you've got some experience with the library).

paulddraper• 8 years ago

they don't need a dependency manager.

For not needing a dependency manager, Go sure has developed an amazing number of them!

https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/PackageManagementTools

https://github.com/avelino/awesome-go/blob/master/README.md#...

In fact, Go probably has the most package managers of any language I've ever seen.

gerred• 8 years ago

Perhaps everyone coming from other languages who can't imagine a world with a good standard library!

outside1234• 8 years ago

Which is a good thing, because Go's dependency management is terrible!

mlevental• 8 years ago

In Golang, dependencies are minimised. Everyone tries to stick to the standard library as much as possible.

i don't understand this. yes net/http is nice but there's no router, there's no orm (yes i know that's not really possible at all because of strong typing), yes database/sql exists but you know most everyone uses at least sqlx and e.g. lib/pq. yes html/template is nice but we're all doing SPAs now anyway. okay there's logging but e.g. no websockets. so in what sense is the stl really complete? what modern web app could you write with just the stl?

marcus_holmes8• 8 years ago

You don't need a router (especially for an SPA with client-side routing). If you've got less than 20 or so routes, then a big switch statement is all the routing you need. Learning to write "proper" logic around routes instead of parsing them with regexes was a learning milestone for me.

You don't need an ORM. Mapping database tables to objects directly is a really bad idea. Write SQL, it's easy, simple and cheap. Yes, you'll repeat yourself. Golang generally prefers some repetition to some dependency.

You don't need middleware. Once you get used to handling routes as logic, then the need for middleware kinda vanishes.

You can use the semi-official google websockets package [0]. It's borderline whether this could be considered part of the standard library or not (I use the google uuid package all the time for the same reason). I believe there's an intention to include these packages in the standard library at some point, probably Go v2.

Try it out, it's liberating.

0: https://godoc.org/golang.org/x/net/websocket

rqs• 8 years ago

First, I don't think net/http is nice, but you know what's good about Go? It's so modular that you can replace the builtin HTTP server with other one you like (gorilla/http for example) and your code _can_ just continue to work without modification.

And, Go had many third-party Router, ORM, Websocket and Template Engine implementations out there, many of them are also proud to be ... independent, so you're less likely to end up in a Dependency Hell.

Go standard library is not there to force people to use it, rather, it's there to setup a standard so different people can work together more effectively.

So:

in what sense is the stl really complete? what modern web app could you write with just the stl?

1, It's huge, but not complete;

2, You can actually do it with just Go standard library (No third-party package) if you REALLY wants to. It's not very hygiene though, you will end up wrap many things up for better project structure (And resulting many packages that you might later proudly put on your GitHub page): Use net/http as HTTP server (Request handling and parsing); use net.Dial to connect database and cache (And write their protocol); html/template for outputting rendered HTML landing page; encoding/json for parsing and outputting API request and respond.

donatj2• 8 years ago

There is totally a router, ServeMux, which while basic is enough for 90% of basic tasks if you structure your requests REST-y.

As for ORM, you should basically never use an ORM, ever. They’re a crutch. Learn SQL, write some basic mappers and your SQL will be so much quicker and more optimized than an ORM can generate. An ORM is literally throwing money out the window.

https://golang.org/pkg/net/http/#ServeMux.Handle

lloeki• 8 years ago

yes net/http is nice but there's no router, there's no orm... yes database/sql exists but you know most everyone uses... yes html/template is nice but we're all...

Three fallacies of dependencies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi5A3cK1LNA

what modern web app could you write with just the stl?

Lots. You just have to change your frame of mind.

i know that's not really possible at all because of strong typing

Once you realise the above, you also realise that most of the time you don't need all that fancy stuff and you just write super boring code that works.

masklinn3• 8 years ago

In Node, the standard library is effectively non-existent, so Node devs get trained and acclimatised to dependencies.

Have you ever actually taken a look at it? https://nodejs.org/api/index.html

In Golang, dependencies are minimised. Everyone tries to stick to the standard library as much as possible. Because the standard library is so good, for most projects this is perfectly reasonable.

Meh. The Python stdlib has been considered "good" for a long time[0], but the last few years people commonly reach out for external dependencies.

It's not because the stdlib has gotten less good (the opposite), it's because the experience of publishing and using external dependencies has significantly improved.

I'd say the first thing every Node dev should know when learning Go is that they don't need a dependency manager.

They do, they just don't have one. Which is why people tend not to bring in external dependencies: bringing in external dependencies in Go is a traumatic experience, much as it used to be in Python a few years back.

[0] in fact this exact same argument was relatively common in the mid-to-late aughts, Java developers dipping their toes into Python would complain about the state of dependency management and get told that the stdlib is so good you don't need dependency management, the stdlib is almost all you need and there's no need for advanced dependency management for just one or two dependencies…

oneweekwonder2• 8 years ago

much as it used to be in Python a few years back.

few years back being pre-2011, with pep 405[0] and virtualenv[1] solving most of the nostalgic py dep hell problems.

venv's been a option since 2007, only getting pep'ed later?

[0] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0405/

[1] https://virtualenv.pypa.io/en/stable/changes/#id54

todd_wanna_code4• 8 years ago

So I am trying to move away from NodeJs for my next project and I can't decide between Elixir and Go. Can't decide what to choose, any idea if there is any advantage for a noob to learn one or the other?

mzzter2• 8 years ago

I’d say it depends on what you want to build (disclaimer: I have written a lot of Go but have only read Elixir source). If full stack monolith, use Elixir because of Phoenix; if microservice arch, use Go with gRPC protobufs for messaging.

IMO, both languages seem to result in very readable source code; and many examples of how to do either exist on GitHub.

todd_wanna_code4• 8 years ago

Awesome, one thing, what is the advantage of microservices, to lets say, modular monolith?

jrobn• 8 years ago

Do both and and then make an educated decision on which languages fits best for the project goals. They are different tools. But to be honest, I'm an Elixir fan :-)

todd_wanna_code4• 8 years ago

I think I will start with elixir too since I am already a bit familiar with Ruby.

sfilargi• 8 years ago

Go is another imperative language with mutable variables and static typing.

I would say go with Elixir or even better, Erlang. It will open your mind to new ideas.

beckler2• 8 years ago

I built a web app in Go recently, and while it was enjoyable, progress was pretty slow. I eventually decided to change gears and rebuild it in Elixir, and so far I have no regrets. Phoenix is pretty fast, awesome, and powerful. There are a few concepts you have to learn, but overall it's been a much simpler experience and way faster to prototype with.

todd_wanna_code4• 8 years ago

I am also thinking about going the elixir way, what did you use to get started?

yur838385• 8 years ago

To counter this point, I knocked out a web app in Go recently in a few hours. I think the speed of development depends on your familiarity.

Having said that, I would suggest the GP try both. I'm keen to try my hand at Elixir soon.

mamcx• 8 years ago

When I decide about a tool/language (I have learned now dozens) I just think in the HARDEST task that I could possible anticipate. Also, I do some basic stuff. In my case, I try to see how well is to interface with RDBMS.

I try to do it with them and then decide.

So, in short, build a mental "benchmark" that is representative to help to decide if X is right for you

eksemplar2• 8 years ago

I don’t see why you move away from Node unless it was for a JAVA spring boot or .net core, especially now that node has actually begun to enter real world usage and enterprise on a large scale.

Then again I would have said something similar about picking up Node in the earlier days, so who knows.

I doubt Go and Ekixir will ever gain the same reach Node has though. Node has the advantage of JavaScript being an unavoidable part of your web stack, so it’ll always have value. With more and more IoT picking up Node as well, it has a bright future.

Given the two choices, I’d go with Elixir. Golang is hyped in America, but it has really terrible production times and isn’t really good at anything except a few use cases.

This won’t be a popular opinion, but my context is Danish enterprise, and I’ve never seen anyone hire a Go or Elixir programmer, and I honestly doubt I ever will because the majority of our backend workforce is either JAVA or .Net.

Learning new tech is great of course, but I’d rather hire someone who was really great at one particularly stack than someone who was mediocre at multiple. Anyone can make a simple web-app in Go, Node, Elixir, Django, Asp or Java, but what I would need my hires to do was things like OIOSAML authentication with ADFS, and if you can’t do that because you learned Go instead of playing around with passport.js, you’d quite honestly not get hired.

thesmallestcat• 8 years ago

Let us know how a passport.js hiring filter works out long-term.

flavio812• 8 years ago

especially now that node has actually begun to enter real world usage and enterprise on a large scale.

That's why i'm starting to avoid as much as possible all new/updated online services for serious stuff.

conradfr• 8 years ago

I'm looking for a web job in Paris at the moment and there is definitely many Go offering, maybe not be as much as Java or C# (I don't look for those) but still.

Also I went to the last Elixir meetup and there is some companies hiring, but it's obviously very new.

w0rd-driven• 8 years ago

Why not both? Take the most popular web frameworks and see how quickly you ramp up in say a week or two week sprint.

I'm more of a fan of the Ruby syntax and the Phoenix framework is definitely a breath of fresh air. My next web project wants to be with Elixir but for a generic cross platform cli program, I'm eager to learn Go.

sghiassy• 8 years ago

Super helpful to learn about Go using my existing understanding of NodeJS. Keep it up! Thx

ingas• 8 years ago

It's only natural that coming from such terrible mess as javascript ecosystem author is trying to solve problems he encountered in past.

I wrote comment to him:

It's only natural that you're trying to find solutions for problems you encountered in past.

But exploring new technology this way leads to absolutely natural mistakes. You're are worring about wrong things.

Dependency management This problem is not (and never was) in such terrible scale as in javascript.

You can forget about this problem while you learn go. I suppose that dep will be released offically when you will really need this.

Asynchronicity I did the same mistake as you: I thought that channels and messages are similar to Actor pattern in Erlang, Akka.

Don't try to think about promises, futures and other abstraction when you programming in go.

In fact, you need learn synchronicity now, golang already asynchronous in its nature.

illuminati1911• 8 years ago

Is there really anything else in Go than "pretty good standard library". Looking at this and many other Go discussion it seems there isn't.

I've been using Go for a while now and while standard library is ok and definitely better than the one in Node.js and I really like strong typing, I still have to say Go is probably one of the worst programming languages I have ever seen in my life.

Error handling is from the stone age, no support for generics, no support for functional programming, no real enum but instead "a hack" you have build by yourself, dependency management without versions etc.

Also the hyped features such as channels are nice, but nothing a simple Rx-library couldn't do.

Due to the language limitations it's also nearly impossible to write elegant code with Go. If you take a look at any codebase, build by experienced senior developer or junior dev straight out of college/high school the code is almost always the same:

Tons of "if err != nil" and for loops.

marcus_holmes8• 8 years ago

Yes. Go is all about writing simple, boring, code that works (to paraphrase another comment here). And works really fast.

flavio812• 8 years ago

boring

Not boring. Just "full of boilerplate" which also means that it will be a nightmare to maintain at a certain point of the lifecycle.

strkek• 8 years ago

Is there really anything else in Go than "pretty good standard library".

An easy to understand language spec, a compiler that can spit executables that don't depend on glibc, no dependencies on Python 2, and most (if not all) packages under /x/ are BSD licensed.

Error handling is from the stone age

I actually prefer this approach to explicit error handling, as opposed to the trendy "uncontrolled non-local gotos" approach (a.k.a. "exceptions". I'm borrowing that term from someone else).

The only sane-ish approach to exceptions I'm aware of is that of Java, where you explicitly have to tell which exceptions can happen, and force you to either handle them right there, or modify your function signature accordingly.

Still, with a big `try/catch`, if two calls throw the same exception, both exceptions would go to the exact same `catch` block.

Yeah, thanks, but I appreciate how Go makes ignoring errors very eye-catching. Makes code review easier.

no support for generics

Devs are actually very open to generics. The thing is, nobody has, as of yet, proposed any implementation that would play nice with the rest of the language.

no support for functional programming

I don't see the problem. It's not like every new programming language should support every possible feature known to humanity. They would end up like C++, where you don't know if the next version will add the Unreal Engine to the stdlib.

If anything what we need is more minimalist programming languages, not the next bloat of the century.

no real enum but instead "a hack" you have build by yourself

I can see the point here.

dependency management without versions

This is actually one of the things I like the most about Go. "Fix your thing to work with the latest version, or bundle your working version", sounds very reasonable to me.

No concept of versions, no centralized source for anything. Just repositories and an ad-hoc way to setup your "registry" just by including an HTML tag in a web server you own.

The only assumptions made about "packaging" is that (1) they're somewhere on internet, and (2) you have the command necessary to fetch them.

If anything, what I don't like about `go get` is that adding a new "handler" requires recompiling the `go` executable.

Also the hyped features such as channels are nice, but nothing a simple Rx-library couldn't do.

Sure. Go brings nothing new to the table.

Due to the language limitations it's also nearly impossible to write elegant code with Go.

Most Go code looks elegant to me. Same formatting everywhere (except when someone does not use `gofmt`).

It also means that whenever I see `a + 1`, and the code compiles fine, I know it's a numeric addition, and not an HTTP request, for example.

Go is like a language with some linting in the spec. Compiler error for unused variables? Yes thanks!

Makes reviewing code easier.

If you take a look at any codebase, build by experienced senior developer or junior dev straight out of college/high school the code is almost always the same

Looks like a plus to me.

Tons of "if err != nil"

I don't know, I always considered a good practice to handle errors as soon and as explicitly as possible.

and for loops.

WHAT!? No more `for (;;) {}` vs `while (1) {}` discussions!!!11!1!!ONEONE.

Making people think twice before introducing the Go equivalent of `Array.prototype.forEach` vs `_.each` vs `$.each`, looks like a plus to me as well.

Working as close as possible to the primitives unless strictly necessary.

GhostVII• 8 years ago

If you take a look at any codebase, build by experienced senior developer or junior dev straight out of college/high school the code is almost always the same

I think that's kind of the point though. Go gives you one way to do things, and makes it really easy to read no matter what your level. It makes things very boring, which imo is a good thing in lots of cases. Its also terrible for some use cases because it is quite verbose (as you mentioned, err != nil can get tiresome if errors don't matter much), so you gotta find a good balance.

Learning Go as a Node.js Developer

Related Stories