Author Archives: Dave Cheney

About Dave Cheney

A chaotic neutral System Administrator with super cow powers. My weapons are: * fear * cynicism * an almost fanatical devotion to the command line

Why Go and Rust are not competitors

This is a short blog post explaining why I believe that Go and Rust are not competitors.

Why people think Rust and Go are competitors

To explain why I think Rust and Go are not competitors, I want to to lay out the reasons why I think the question is being asked in the first place.

  • Rust and Go were announced around the same time. Go was conceived in 2007 and became public in November of 2009. Rust appeared a few months later in 2010, although Graydon hints that Rust may have been conceived much earlier. In either case, both languages have a distinguished pedigree of influential predecessors. In the case of Go, Hoare’s CSP, Alef, and Pike’s Newsqueak. Rust is viewed as an extension of the ML family of languages.
  • Rust and Go are both touted as memory safe. While this statement is absolutely true, both languages will not tolerate unsafe memory access, what is more important is that the world will not tolerate any new language which is not memory safe. It just so happens that Go and Rust are the first two languages to emerge after decades of evidence that in the real world, programmers as a whole, cannot safely manage memory manually.
  • Both are young languages, Go achieving 1.0 status in 2012, and Rust earlier this year, implying ambition and upward mobility towards a space occupied by incumbent languages.

These are the arguments that I see used to justify why Rust and Go are competitors. Laying them out like this, it’s hard to find them compelling, indeed they appear circumstantial.

Why I think rust and Go are not competitors

So, why do I think that Go and Rust are not competitors ?

  • Rust is focused on “free of charge” abstractions. If this sounds familiar, this has been the catch cry for C++ for decades. As a language which defers many low level actions to its runtime, Go sacrifices some performance for its goals of simplicity and orthogonality.
  • Rust is designed for interoperability with C; Rust code is expected to be embedded in other large programs which follow the C calling convention. Go does allow some interoperability through cgo, but this is clearly not the expected way that Go programs will be written.
  • Go is focused on concurrency as a first class concept. That is not to say you cannot find aspects of Go’s actor oriented concurrency in Rust, but it is left as an exercise to the programmer.
  • Go is focused on programmer productivity, across the whole software development lifecycle. Rust, as a front end to LLVM, punts on many of those decision.

Rust and Go are not competitors

Go is focused on making large teams of programmers efficient, though rigid application of simplicity — ideas which are not simple or lead to non orthogonal corner cases are rejected.

Rust is focused on a class of programs which cannot tolerate unsafe memory access (neither can Go, I don’t think there is any appetite for a new unsafe programming languages) or runtime overhead — ideas which are unsafe, or come with overhead, are rejected or at least pushed out of the core language.

Rust competes for mindshare with C++ and D for programmers who are prepared to accept more complex syntax and semantics (and presumably higher readability costs) in return for the maximum possible performance. For example, micro controllers, AAA game engines, and web rendering engines.

Go competes for mindshare in the post 2006 Internet 2.0 generation of companies who have outgrown languages like Ruby, Python, and Node.js (v8) and have lost patience with the high deployment costs of JVM based languages.

Listen up!

Today I was devastated to learn of yet another women being driven from the tech industry.

This is so far from being all right it does not even register on the same scale.

The tech industry is a sick, male dominated, misogynistic, flaccid void that continues to permit weak, small, frightened men to abuse and harass women from a presumed position of anonymous safety.

As harassment, especially online, continues unadmonished I can take the only course of action available to me as a civilian; exclusion.

If you harass or abuse women, you will be excluded from any conference, project, meetup, or venture that I organise or participate in. I will also ensure that other conference organisers, meetup organisers, and business owners are fully aware of your repugnant actions, and urge them to exclude you.

If you harass or abuse women, I will not work at any company who chooses to employ you, and I will not permit any company that I work for to hire you.

So, if you think that my statements are unfair or possibly an overreaction, that it’s all in good fun, or maybe I should lighten up, then next time you choose to step out of your fetid cave to abuse a woman, remember that this is not a threat.

It is a promise.

gb, a project based build tool for the Go programming language

A few months ago I introduced gb as a proof of concept to the audience at GDG Berlin. Since then, together with a small band of contributors and an enthusiastic cabal of early adopters, gb has moved from proof of concept, written mostly on trains during a trip through Europe, to something approaching a usable build tool.

This post gives an introduction to gb, and explains the benefits of adopting a project based workflow for building solutions in Go. If you want to read more about the motivations for gb, please read the previous post in this series.


gb is a project based build tool for the Go programming language.

gb projects define an on disk layout that permits repeatable builds via source vendoring. When vendoring (copying) code into a gb project, the original source is not rewritten or modified.

As gb is written in Go, its packages can be used to create plugins to gb that extend its functionality.

Why is a project based approach useful ?

Why is a project based approach, as opposed to a workspace based approach like $GOPATH, useful ?

First and foremost, by structuring your Go application as a project, rather than a piece of a distributed global workspace, you gain control over all the source that goes into your application, including that of its dependencies.

Second, while your project’s layout contains both the code that you have written, and the code that your code depends on, there is a clear separation between the two; they live in different subdirectory trees.

Thirdly, now your project, and by extension the repository that houses it, contains all the source to build your application, having multiple working copies on disk is trivial. If you are part of a team responsible for maintaining multiple releases, this is a very useful property.

Lastly. As your project can be built at any time without going out to the internet to fetch code, you are insulated from political, financial, or technical events that can unexpectedly break your build. Conversely, as the dependencies for your project are included with the project, upgrading those dependencies is atomic and affects everyone on the team automatically without them having to run external steps like go get -u or godeps -u dependencies.txt.

How is gb different ?

In the previous section I outlined the advantages I see in using a project based tool to build Go applications. I want to digress for a moment to explain why gb is different to other existing go build tools.

gb is not a wrapper around the go tool. Not wrapping the go tool means gb is not constrained to solutions that can be implemented with $GOPATH tricks. Not relying on the go tool means gb can ship faster, and fix bugs faster than the fixed pace of releases of the Go toolchain.

You can read more about the rationale for gb here, and reasons for not wrapping the go tool here.

Being a project owner

In the discussions I’ve had about gb, I’ve tried to emphasise the role of the project owner. The owner of the project has a special responsibility; they are responsible for admitting new dependencies into a project, and for curating those dependencies once they are part of the shipping product.

Whether the role of project owner falls to a single engineer, or is distributed across your whole team, it is the project owner who is ultimately responsible for shipping your product, so gb gives you the tools to achieve this without having to rely on a third party.

Project ownership is important. You, the developer, the project owner, the build engineer, needs to own all the source that goes into your product whether you wrote it or not. Don’t be the person who cannot deliver a release because GitHub is down.


No import rewriting

gb is built around a philosophy of leaving the source of a project’s dependency untouched.

The are various technical reasons why I believe import rewriting is a bad idea for Go projects, I won’t repeat them here.

It is my hope that maybe one day, build tools like gb can get a bit smarter about managing dependencies, and avoid the need for whole cloth vendoring, but this cannot happen if imports are rewritten.

Demo time

Enough background, let’s show off gb.

Creating a gb project

Creating a gb project is as simple as creating a directory. This directory can be anywhere of your choosing; it does not need to be inside $GOPATH, in fact gb does not use $GOPATH.

% mkdir -p demo/src
% cd demo

demo is now a gb project. A gb project is defined as any directory that contains a directory called src/. We’ll refer to the root of the project, demo in this case, as the project root, or $PROJECT for short. Let’s go ahead and create a single main package.

% mkdir -p src/cmd/helloworld
% cat > src/cmd/helloworld/main.go <<EOF
package main

import "fmt"

func main() {
       fmt.Println("Hello world from gb")

Commands (main packages) don’t have to be placed in src/cmd/, but that is a nice tradition that has emerged from the Go standard library, so we’ll follow it here. Also note that although gb does not use the go tool to compile Go code, that code must still be structured into packages.

In fact gb is much stricter in this respect, Go code can only be built if it is inside a package, there are no facilities to build or run a single .go source file.

gb supports all the usual ways of compiling one package by passing the name of the package to gb build, but it is simpler to just build the entire project by staying at the root of your project and issuing gb build to build all the source in your project.

gb has support for incremental compilation, so even though gb build is told to build all the source in the project, it will only recompile the parts that have changed; there is no need to point them out to the compiler. Also note that there is no gb install command. gb build both builds and installs (caches packages forincremental compilation later).

With all this said, let’s go ahead an build this project, then run the resulting program

% gb build
% bin/helloworld 
Hello world from gb

By default gb prints out the names of packages it is compiling, you can use the -q flag if you want to suppress this output. When compiling, packages will be built and placed in $PROJECT/pkg/ for possible reuse by latter compilation cycles, main packages (commands), will be placed in $PROJECT/bin/.

If this project contained multiple commands, they would all be built and placed in $PROJECT/bin/. To demonstrated this I created a few more main packages in this project, let’s compile them and look at the result

% gb build
% ls bin/
client  helloworld  server

gb project layout

The previous section walked through the creation of a gb project from scratch and showed using gb build to compile the project.

Let’s have a look at the directory tree of this project an add some annotations to reinforce the gb project concepts.

% tree $(pwd)
├── bin
│   ├── client
│   ├── helloworld
│   └── server
└── src
    └── cmd
        ├── client
        │   └── main.go
        ├── helloworld
        │   └── main.go
        └── server
            └── main.go

6 directories, 6 files

Starting from the top, we have a bin/ directory, this is created by gb build when building main packages to hold the final output of linking executable programs. Inside bin/ we have the the binaries that were built.

Next is the src/ which contains the subdirectory cmd/ and inside that, three packages, client, helloworld, and server.

The final directories you will find inside a gb project is $PROJECT/pkg/ for compiled go packages, and $PROJECT/vendor/ for the source of your project’s dependencies. We’ll discuss vendoring dependencies later in this piece.

Source control

gb doesn’t care about source control, all it cares about is the source of your project is arranged in the format it expects. How those files got there, or who is responsible for tracking changes to them is outside gb’s concern.

Of course, source control is a great idea, and you should be tracking the source of your project using source control. Let’s create a git repo in the $PROJECT root now

% git init .
Initialized empty Git repository in /home/dfc/demo/.git/
% git add src/
% git commit -am 'initial import'
[master (root-commit) aa1acfd] initial import
 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 src/cmd/client/main.go
 create mode 100644 src/cmd/helloworld/main.go
 create mode 100644 src/cmd/server/main.go

Then of course add a git remote and push to it.

You should not place $PROJECT/bin/ or $PROJECT/pkg/ under source control, as they are temporary directories. You may wish to add a .gitignore or similar to prevent doing so accidentally.

Dependency management

A project which doesn’t have any dependencies, apart from the standard library, is not going to be very a compelling use case for gb. For this next section I’ll walk through creating a new gb project which has several dependencies.

The source for this project is online at Let’s start by creating the project structure and adding some source

% mkdir example-gsftp
% cd example-gsftp
% mkdir -p src/cmd/gsftp # this is our main package
% vim src/cmd/gsftp/main.go

The source for cmd/gsftp/main.go is too long to include, but is available here.

This project depends on package and package, which itself has a dependency on In its current state, if you were to gb build this project it would fail with an error like this

% gb build
FATAL command "build" failed: failed to resolve import path "cmd/gsftp": cannot find package "" in any of:
        /home/dfc/go/src/ (from $GOROOT)
        /home/dfc/example-gsftp/src/ (from $GOPATH)

gb is unable to find the a package with an import path of, in either the project’s source directory, $PROJECT/src/, or the project’s vendored source directory, $PROJECT/vendor/src/.

note the references to $GOPATH are a side effect of reusing the go/build package. gb does not use $GOPATH, this message will be addressed in the future.

Now, I have copies of all of the source of these packages in my $GOPATH, so I can copy them into the $PROJECT/vendor/src directory by hand to satisfy the build.

% mkdir -p vendor/src/
% cp -r $GOPATH/src/* vendor/src/
% mkdir -p vendor/src/
% cp -r $GOPATH/src/* vendor/src/
% mkdir -p vendor/src/
% cp -r $GOPATH/src/* vendor/src/
% gb build
% ls -l bin/gsftp
-rwxrwxr-x 1 dfc dfc 5949744 Jun  8 14:05 bin/gsftp

For completeness’s sake, let’s take a look at the directory structure of the project with these vendored dependencies.

% tree -d $(pwd)                                                                                                                         
├── bin
├── pkg
│   └── linux
│       └── amd64
│           ├──
│           │   ├── kr
│           │   └── pkg
│           └──
│               └── x
│                   └── crypto
│                       └── ssh
├── src
│   └── cmd
│       └── gsftp
└── vendor
    └── src
        │   ├── kr
        │   │   └── fs
        │   └── pkg
        │       └── sftp
        │           └── examples
        │               ├── buffered-read-benchmark
        │               ├── buffered-write-benchmark
        │               ├── streaming-read-benchmark
        │               └── streaming-write-benchmark
            └── x
                └── crypto
                    └── ssh
                        ├── agent
                        ├── terminal
                        ├── test
                        └── testdata

34 directories

Using the gb-vendor plugin

gb’s answer to dependency management is vendoring, copying the source of your project’s dependencies into $PROJECT/vendor/src/. As you saw above, this process can be quite tedious, especially if you do not have the source of the dependency easily to hand.

To assist with this process, gb ships with a plugin called gb-vendor, which aims to automate a lot of this work.

gb-vendor can fetch the dependencies of your project. Let’s use it to automate the steps we just did above.

% rm -rf vendor/src
% gb vendor fetch
% gb vendor fetch
% gb vendor fetch
% gb build

At this point it is a good idea to add your project’s vendor/ directory to source control.

% git add vendor/
% git commit -am 'added vendored dependencies'

gb-vendor also provides commands to update, delete, and report on the vendor dependencies of a project. For example

% gb vendor update

will replace the source of with the latest available upstream.

% gb vendor delete

Will remove $PROJECT/vendor/src/ from disk, and remove its entry from the manifest file.

Lastly, the list subcommand behaves similarly to go list and lets you report on the dependencies recorded in the manifest file.

% gb vendor list     master  f234c3c6540c0358b1802f7fd90c0879af9232eb        master  2788f0dbd16903de03cb8186e5c7d97b69ad387b  master  c10c31b5e94b6f7a0283272dc2bb27163dcea24b

gb-vendor is completely optional

At this point you’re probably saying, “Hang on, aren’t you the person who made a big song and dance about no metadata files ?”.

Yes, it is true that gb-vendor records the dependencies it fetches in a manifest file, ($PROJECT/vendor/manifest), but this manifest file is only used by gb-vendor, and is not part of gb.

gb-vendor is a plugin, it adds a little bit of smarts on top of git clone, or hg checkout, but it isn’t mandatory to use gb-vendor to build gb projects.

All gb cares about is the source on disk, you don’t have to use it. If your workflow works well with svn externals or git subtrees, or maybe just copying the package and recording the revision you copied in the commit message, you can use that approach as well.

gb-vendor is not required to use gb, and gb is completely oblivious to its operation. All that gb cares about is finding the source on disk with the correct layout. You are free to use any method of managing the contents of your $PROJET/vendor/src directory.

How does gb handle the diamond dependency problem ?

In every Go program, regardless of which tool built it (gb, the go tool, Makefile, or by hand), there may only be one copy of a package linked into the final binary.

For project owners this means that if they encounter a situation where two dependencies of their project expect different exported API’s of a third package, they must resolve this problem at the point they introduce these dependencies into their project.

Resolving a diamond dependency conflict requires the project owner choose which copy (Go packages do not have a notion of versions) of the source of that third dependency they will place in $PROJECT/vendor/src/ and adjusting, updating, or replacing other dependencies as required.

Can a gb project be a library ?

In the presentations I’ve made about gb, I have focussed on development teams shipping products written in Go. I see these teams as the ones who have the most to gain, and the least to lose, from adopting gb, so it is reasonable to focus on those teams first.

You can also use gb to build libraries (effectively gb projects that don’t have main packages), and then vendor the source of that project’s src/ directory into another gb project as demonstrated above.

At the moment no automated tools exist to assist with this process, but it is likely that gb-vendor will acquire this ability if there is significant demand in developing libraries in the gb project format.

Wrapping up

This post has described the theory and the practice of using gb. I hope that you have found it useful, and in turn that you may find gb useful if you are part of a team charged with delivering solutions using Go.

  • Project based workflow
  • Repeatable builds via source vendoring without import rewriting
  • Reusable components with a plugin interface

Friday pop quiz: the smallest buffer

bytes.Buffer is a tremendously useful type, but it’s a bit large1.

% sizeof -p bytes Buffer
Buffer 112

… and that is just the overhead, we haven’t put any data into the buffer yet.

This Friday’s2 challenge is to write a replacement for bytes.Buffer that implements io.ReadWriter and allows the caller to discover the length and capacity of the buffer.

The smallest and most creative solution wins fame, adoration, and a first run gb sticker.


  • The code must continue to be correctly formatted.
  • Points will be deducted for arguing with the judge (me).
  • Everything you need to win this challenge is in the description; think laterally.


As I hoped, most readers quickly figured out a good way to save a few lines was to declare Read and Write methods on a []byte, not a struct. This would lead to some small complications dereferencing the value rather than treating it as a struct with a buf []byte field, but everyone seemed to figure that out, which is good, as these are useful skills to have in your Go toolbelt.

A few readers also spotted the deliberate loophole I left in the wording of the question around obtaining the length and the capacity of the buffer. Declaring a new type with an underlying type of a slice gives you access to the len and cap, so finding the length of a slice requires no additional methods on the type.

type Buffer []byte

func main() {
        var b Buffer

Thus, the core of this challenge was to define a new slice type that had Read and Write methods, which would end up taking an overhead of 3 machine words, 24 bytes on 64bit platforms, 12 on 32bit.

One nice property of this arrangement is that if you already have a []byte slice, you can convert it into a Buffer and consume zero additional storage, as you are effectively replacing the 3 words that described the []byte with 3 words which describe your new slice type.

s := []byte{0x01, 0x02, 0x03}
buf := Buffer(s)

However, as usually happens with these quizzes, a solution arrives that wipes the smug smile from my face,

Kevin, I take my imaginary hat off to you, Sir.

For the record, here was the solution I came up with last night. It is longer than I hoped it would be because of the odd contract that the standard library bytes.Buffer tests require. I think a more liberal reading of the io.Reader contract would result in a smaller entry.

// A Buffer is a variable-sized buffer of bytes with Read and Write
// methods. The zero value for Buffer is an empty buffer ready to use.
type Buffer []byte

// Write writes len(p) bytes from p to the Buffer.
func (b *Buffer) Write(p []byte) (int, error) {
        *b = append(*b, p...)
        return len(p), nil

// Read reads up to len(p) bytes into p from the Buffer.
func (b *Buffer) Read(p []byte) (int, error) {
        if len(p) == 0 {
                return 0, nil
        if len(*b) == 0 {
                return 0, io.EOF
        n := copy(p, *b)
        *b = (*b)[n:]
        return n, nil

Playground link

So, prizes and glory to @rf, Ben Lubar, and @kevingillette, with special mentions to Egon Elbre, and Dan Kortschak and Douglas Clark from G+. Some of you were more correct than others, but you were all very quick, and that’s got to count for something. I’ll be in touch with your prize.

If a reader wants to debate their solution, and possibly best ours, consider this an open challenge.

  1. Where do you get the sizeof program ? Why, from Russ Cox of course, (oops, it looks like this doesn’t work with Go 1.4.2, better use tip, or try this online version)
  2. I’m sorry if it isn’t Friday where you live. I can’t help it if Australians live in the future.

Hear me speak about Go performance at OSCON

I’m going to be speaking at OSCON this year about Go performance. The title of the talk is High performance servers without the event loop and will focus on the features of the language and its runtime that transparently let Go programmers write high performance network servers without resorting to event loops and callback spaghetti.

As the OSCON website is a bit light on for details, here are some more to entice you.


Conventional wisdom suggests that high performance servers require native threads, or more recently, event loops.

Neither solution is without its downside. Threads carry a high overhead in terms of scheduling cost and memory footprint. Event loops ameliorate those costs, but introduce their own requirements for a complex callback driven style.

A common refrain when talking about Go is it’s a language that works well on the server; static binaries, powerful concurrency, and high performance.

This talk focuses on the last two items, how the language and the runtime transparently let Go programmers write highly scalable network servers without having to worry about thread management or blocking I/O.

The goal of this talk is to introduce the following features of the language and the runtime:

  • Escape Analysis
  • Stack management
  • Processes and threads vs goroutines
  • Integrated network poller

These four features work in concert to build an argument for the suitability of Go as a language for writing high performance servers.

How does a 20% discount sound ?

O’Reilly have provided me with a discount code DAVEC20 that you can use to save 20% on your registration.

As a bonus, if enough people register for OSCON using the discount code DAVEC20, the organisers have said they will give me a free pass to the event which I plan to donate to Women Who Code. I know that this is a lot of ifs, but it is worth a try.

So, if you’re interested in hearing me, and hundreds of others speak at OSCON this year, you can save yourself 20% and recieve some good karma in the process. What’s too lose ?

Struct composition with Go

This is a quick Friday blog post to talk about a recent experience I had working on a piece Juju code that needed to capture the data being sent over a net.Conn.

Most Gophers know that the net package provides a net.Pipe function which returns a pair of net.Conns representing an in memory network connection. net.Pipe is ideal for testing components that expect to talk over the network without all the mucking around of actually using the network.

The Go standard library also contains the super useful io.MultiWriter function which takes any number of io.Writers and returns another io.Writer that will send a copy of any data written to it to each of its underlying io.Writers. Now I had all the pieces I needed to create a net.Conn that could record the data written through it.

func main() {
        client, server := net.Pipe()
        var buf bytes.Buffer
        client = io.MultiWriter(client, &buf)

        // ...

Except this code does not compile.

# command-line-arguments
/tmp/sandbox866813815/main.go:13: cannot use io.MultiWriter(client, &buf) (type io.Writer) as type net.Conn in assignment:
	io.Writer does not implement net.Conn (missing Close method)

The value returned by io.MultiWriter is an implementation of io.Writer, it doesn’t have the rest of the methods necessary to fulfil the net.Conn interface; what I really need is the ability to replace the Write method of an existing net.Conn value. We can do this with embedding by creating a structure that embeds both a net.Conn and an independant io.Writer as anonymous fields.

type recordingConn struct {

func main() {
        client, server := net.Pipe()
        var buf bytes.Buffer
        client = &recordingConn {
                Conn: client,
                Writer: io.MultiWriter(client, &buf),

        // ...

The recodingConn embeds a net.Conn ensuring that recordingConn implements net.Conn. It also gives us a place to hang the io.MultiWriter so we can syphon off the data written by the client. There is only one small problem remaining.

# command-line-arguments
/tmp/sandbox439875759/main.go:24: recordingConn.Write is ambiguous

Because both fields in the structure are types that have a Write method, the compiler cannot decide which one should be the called. To resolve this ambiguity we can add a Write method on the recordingConn type itself:

func (c *recordingConn) Write(buf []byte) (int, error) {
        return c.Writer.Write(buf)

With the ambiguity resolved, the recordingConn is now usable as a net.Conn implementation. You can see the full code here.

This is just a small example of the power of struct composition using Go. Can you think of other ways to do this ?

Introducing gb, a project based build tool for the Go programming language

In April 2015 I gave a presentation to the GDG Berlin meetup group (slides, video) discussing my views on reproducible builds using the Go programming language.

Image credit, Nate Finch

Image credit, Nate Finch

As part of that presentation I demonstrated a replacement build tool that I had been developing, gb.

From the feedback I received after the meetup it was clear that many people understood and agreed with my reasoning why reproducible builds in Go are a problem today. However it was equally clear that I had not done a good enough job of explaining how gb works, and why I felt it was necessary to create an alternative build tool to solve the problem of reproducible builds.

With the help of the go-pm mailing list and the feedback from a group of early adopters of gb, I have put together a website for gb with expanded documentation and examples.

I invite you all to visit to learn more about gb.

2015 is going to be the year of Go

Update: Two months after making this post, it’s already out of date, 2015 will feature ten Go conferences.

Last month, during my concluding remarks at Gophercon India, I threw out a statistic:

In 2014 there were five international Go conferences. In 2015 there will be seven.

Barely a month on from this statement I must issue a correction; so far in 2015 there will not be seven Go conferences, but nine ten!. At the rate new Go conferences are appearing this year I fully expect to be publishing yet another correction next month.

Let’s recap:

  • FOSDEM kicked things off in January with the Go dev room track.
  • Gophercon India sold out 350 seats in February for their first two day conference.
  • Mainland China will host their first Go conference with GopherChina in April.
  • The Google I/O 2015 site is light on details at the moment, but is expected to continue the tradition of holding Go code labs and dev sessions.
  • The enigmatic Gocon conference in Japan is expected to make a return this year. update GoCon Summer will be held 21 June 2015
  • Gophercon in Denver, CO last year hosted a sell out crowd of 750 gophers, and this year we’re looking to surpass that record, a lot.
  • GolangUK burst onto the scene a week ago promising a conference for the rapidly growing Go community in the UK.
  • new Inkaconf, Latin America’s first Go conference will run for two days, September 24-25, 2015.
  • GothamGo returns on October 2nd. update the call for papers is open now.
  • Last, but by no means least, dotGo will be back again in November with a larger venue.

And not forgetting the contributions of more than one hundred and thirty local user groups and meetups.

To be able to write a post like this about a language which has only been in the public eye for little over five years is simply unbelievable. With singular exception of Google I/O, every one of these conferences, and every meetup, has spawned from the Go community itself.

Without a doubt, 2015 is going to be the year of Go.

A parable about practice

When I was younger, I wanted to learn to play the guitar (this was the 90’s after all). So I cracked open my piggy bank, bought a decent beginners guitar and took some lessons. I regularly bought the guitar magazines that appeared in the local newsagent and practised along to my favourite songs.

I noodled away at this hobby for a few years. I joined a local band, we even recorded a demo, but never got any gigs. I was disillusioned with my progress, sure I could memorise the fingerings and chords, but my playing style was wooden and my tone stank.

Frustrated, I decided that my beginners guitar wasn’t up to the task and again pouring over guitar magazines I invested in a better guitar, a wah pedal, and a fuzz pedal, and a new amplifier which proudly sported the ultimate in guitar fetishism — a solitary analogue tube.

Alas, I had spent my time working to earn money to buy guitars and accessories instead of practising, my tone still stank, and my style remained wooden, and so when I moved out of home, my guitar didn’t follow me.

Phil Haley and is comments, circa 2002

Phil Haley and is comments, circa 2002

A few years after I joined the workforce, I bought a camera on a whim.

It was early in 2000, so I suspect this was a present to myself for surviving the Y2K debacle (Dave: 1, Mayans: 0). I discovered that some of my co-workers at the time were also keen on photography and this shared interest lead to heated debates about the benefits of Nikon vs Canon, zoom lenses vs prime lenses, the right film stock, and above all the absolute sharpness of the final product.

Soon our cadre would spend hours searching eBay for bargains, or sneak out early on a Friday to ogle the new arrivals at the 2nd hand camera stores. This was the beginning of the end of 35mm film so cameras which, only a few years prior, had been priced outside our reach were suddenly flooding the market.

Pretty soon I had amassed a huge array of Nikon lenses, tripods, adapters, cables, and accessories, and at one point I owned every Nikon professional camera from the F to the F4.

To my credit I put more time into photography than I had into music and after overcoming crippling indecision by whittling my camera collection back to one body and two lenses I started to take images that I was happy with.

Instead of obsessing about the photographs I could take if I had just the right kit, I started investing that money in books and retrospectives of photographers who I admired.

Haters gonna hate

This year it has become sport to characterise Go’s explicit simplicity as crudeness or condescension. To those critics I say: it is a poor craftsman who blames their tools.

Despite your hand wringing over the effrontery of Go’s designers to not include your prerequisite features, interest in Go is sky rocketing. Rather than finding new ways to hate a language for reasons that will not change, why not invest that time and join the growing number of programmers who are using the language to write real software today.

You’ll be amazed what you can get done when you stop looking over your shoulder.

Recruiters, know thy community

I am frequently contacted by recruiters looking for leads. This isn’t an attempt to blow my own horn, I’m sure you are also constantly pestered.

What is frustrating is the recruiters who come calling for leads are universally unaware of the meetups and user groups in the local area for the role they are recruiting for!

Recruiters, how do you expect to be effective in your role as go between if you do not make even the most basic of efforts to join the community for which you are claiming to be proficient in sourcing talent from ?