FAQ
Given Go's amazing compiling speed, wouldn't be amazing to use it just like
we use Javascript?

I'm dreaming of Go inside Chromium (because of openness) with most of it's
std libraries intact, some ones tweaked or even disabled (database?, net?,
os, runtime, unsafe).

"os" and "runtime" (maybe "net" too) can be made available via package
"browser", with DOM manipulation, XHR, and all the new HTML5 APIs
(LocalStore, QuerySelector, WebSockets, WebWorkers, Fullscreen, Pointer
Lock, etc...).

Obviously runtime would need some changes and go's toolchain may need some
adapting too (go getting may be some kind of zip autopackaging, downloading
and compiling feature).

Loads of work but still a lot better than most of current Javascript things
out there and also it'll a massive boost for Go.

Javascript is a nice language but it's a clusterfuck of WAT<https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat>s
and it's not getting any better.
Nowadays you need like 80kb (jQuery 1.9 is actually 91kb) just for a
library to get things right with most browsers.

Ok, jQuery isn't required everywhere, you can use plain Javascript if you
want, but then IE will come and you'll have nightmares.

Why isn't better to use an already tested native language with dangerous
capabilities off?

Is this useful? Is it doable?
Let me know what you think.

Best regards,
Carlos


*P.D.*: I know there are some "alternatives" like Dart or TypeScript but
it's still javascript with things on top (Dart is promising but I'd prefer
Go in its place; Coffescript is just a transpiler with Ruby syntax, no
thanks).

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Search Discussions

  • Job van der Zwan at Jan 29, 2013 at 10:36 pm
    emscripten + Go LLVM compiler?

    https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki

    On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 20:33:29 UTC+1, Carlos Cobo wrote:

    Given Go's amazing compiling speed, wouldn't be amazing to use it just
    like we use Javascript?

    I'm dreaming of Go inside Chromium (because of openness) with most of it's
    std libraries intact, some ones tweaked or even disabled (database?, net?,
    os, runtime, unsafe).

    "os" and "runtime" (maybe "net" too) can be made available via package
    "browser", with DOM manipulation, XHR, and all the new HTML5 APIs
    (LocalStore, QuerySelector, WebSockets, WebWorkers, Fullscreen, Pointer
    Lock, etc...).

    Obviously runtime would need some changes and go's toolchain may need some
    adapting too (go getting may be some kind of zip autopackaging, downloading
    and compiling feature).

    Loads of work but still a lot better than most of current Javascript
    things out there and also it'll a massive boost for Go.

    Javascript is a nice language but it's a clusterfuck of WAT<https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat>s
    and it's not getting any better.
    Nowadays you need like 80kb (jQuery 1.9 is actually 91kb) just for a
    library to get things right with most browsers.

    Ok, jQuery isn't required everywhere, you can use plain Javascript if you
    want, but then IE will come and you'll have nightmares.

    Why isn't better to use an already tested native language with dangerous
    capabilities off?

    Is this useful? Is it doable?
    Let me know what you think.

    Best regards,
    Carlos


    *P.D.*: I know there are some "alternatives" like Dart or TypeScript but
    it's still javascript with things on top (Dart is promising but I'd prefer
    Go in its place; Coffescript is just a transpiler with Ruby syntax, no
    thanks).
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Carlos Cobo at Jan 30, 2013 at 12:01 am
    Still Javascript but nice alternative.
    On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:35:58 PM UTC+1, Job van der Zwan wrote:

    emscripten + Go LLVM compiler?

    https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki

    On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 20:33:29 UTC+1, Carlos Cobo wrote:

    Given Go's amazing compiling speed, wouldn't be amazing to use it just
    like we use Javascript?

    I'm dreaming of Go inside Chromium (because of openness) with most of
    it's std libraries intact, some ones tweaked or even disabled (database?,
    net?, os, runtime, unsafe).

    "os" and "runtime" (maybe "net" too) can be made available via package
    "browser", with DOM manipulation, XHR, and all the new HTML5 APIs
    (LocalStore, QuerySelector, WebSockets, WebWorkers, Fullscreen, Pointer
    Lock, etc...).

    Obviously runtime would need some changes and go's toolchain may need
    some adapting too (go getting may be some kind of zip autopackaging,
    downloading and compiling feature).

    Loads of work but still a lot better than most of current Javascript
    things out there and also it'll a massive boost for Go.

    Javascript is a nice language but it's a clusterfuck of WAT<https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat>s
    and it's not getting any better.
    Nowadays you need like 80kb (jQuery 1.9 is actually 91kb) just for a
    library to get things right with most browsers.

    Ok, jQuery isn't required everywhere, you can use plain Javascript if you
    want, but then IE will come and you'll have nightmares.

    Why isn't better to use an already tested native language with dangerous
    capabilities off?

    Is this useful? Is it doable?
    Let me know what you think.

    Best regards,
    Carlos


    *P.D.*: I know there are some "alternatives" like Dart or TypeScript but
    it's still javascript with things on top (Dart is promising but I'd prefer
    Go in its place; Coffescript is just a transpiler with Ruby syntax, no
    thanks).
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Andrew Wilkins at Jan 30, 2013 at 1:55 am

    On Wednesday, 30 January 2013 03:33:29 UTC+8, Carlos Cobo wrote:
    I'm dreaming of Go inside Chromium (because of openness) with most of it's
    std libraries intact, some ones tweaked or even disabled (database?, net?,
    os, runtime, unsafe).
    I'm working on such a thing in my spare time: an LLVM-base Go compiler
    which will be able to target PNaCl.
    https://plus.google.com/102738380796586573408/posts/MHRre7YF7nf
    https://github.com/axw/llgo

    It's still early days, and progress has slowed as I've been working on
    refactoring the code to bring things in line with Go 1.1, and to use the
    refreshed go/types package. Also, my second child is expected in a week's
    time, so expect progress to slow even more.

    Feel free to chime in on the new llgo-dev group:
    https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/llgo-dev

    Cheers,
    Andrew

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Daniel Bryan at Jan 31, 2013 at 12:35 pm
    I'd be careful with the assumption that a different language could help with the compatibility issues you see in JavaScript; those issues come from _implementations_ that are incomplete or based upon an incompatible interpretation of standard/ spec. Most of them are due to inconsistencies in the browser/document API, not the language itself. Go wouldn't be any better there.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Carlos Cobo at Jan 31, 2013 at 1:05 pm
    You are right, it'd be a lot better to have a VM so anyone could make the
    language they want, no matter the paradigm (functional, imperative,
    whatever) but anytime I see that suggestion someone says that kills the
    openness of the web.

    I'm not gonna discuss why Javascript is bad, anyone will agree on that.
    " Just don't use the bad parts! " <http://www.jslint.com/lint.html> doesn't
    make the language any better. It has loads of bad things in there we can't
    get rid of.

    My proposal is to take an existing STATIC general purpose language with a
    nice spec, already implemented, and take out all the insecure parts of it
    out an use it in the browser.

    Why Go? Because we can add nice things to the language without changing its
    syntax (go.net, go.crypto subrepositories). Following this style we could
    patch in quickly any new API Google, Mozilla, Microsoft, Apple or whoever
    does the new magic thing wants to add to the language.

    It must be a good idea if Microsoft is behind TypeScript and Google behind
    Dart.
    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 1:35:34 PM UTC+1, Daniel Bryan wrote:

    I'd be careful with the assumption that a different language could help
    with the compatibility issues you see in JavaScript; those issues come from
    _implementations_ that are incomplete or based upon an incompatible
    interpretation of standard/ spec. Most of them are due to inconsistencies
    in the browser/document API, not the language itself. Go wouldn't be any
    better there.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Carlos Cobo at Jan 31, 2013 at 1:09 pm
    Oups I forgot something:

    Why Go?:
    - Subrepositories thingy as I said before.
    - Compiling speed.
    - Being strict by default (e.g: imports not used are errors).
    - gofmt, of course.
    - Similarity between Javascript and Go (except channels).
    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 2:05:42 PM UTC+1, Carlos Cobo wrote:

    You are right, it'd be a lot better to have a VM so anyone could make the
    language they want, no matter the paradigm (functional, imperative,
    whatever) but anytime I see that suggestion someone says that kills the
    openness of the web.

    I'm not gonna discuss why Javascript is bad, anyone will agree on that.
    " Just don't use the bad parts! " <http://www.jslint.com/lint.html>doesn't make the language any better. It has loads of bad things in there
    we can't get rid of.

    My proposal is to take an existing STATIC general purpose language with a
    nice spec, already implemented, and take out all the insecure parts of it
    out an use it in the browser.

    Why Go? Because we can add nice things to the language without changing
    its syntax (go.net, go.crypto subrepositories). Following this style we
    could patch in quickly any new API Google, Mozilla, Microsoft, Apple or
    whoever does the new magic thing wants to add to the language.

    It must be a good idea if Microsoft is behind TypeScript and Google behind
    Dart.
    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 1:35:34 PM UTC+1, Daniel Bryan wrote:

    I'd be careful with the assumption that a different language could help
    with the compatibility issues you see in JavaScript; those issues come from
    _implementations_ that are incomplete or based upon an incompatible
    interpretation of standard/ spec. Most of them are due to inconsistencies
    in the browser/document API, not the language itself. Go wouldn't be any
    better there.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Günter Zöchbauer at Jan 31, 2013 at 6:53 pm
    It would be nice to have one language for client and server development - Go

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Michael Schneider at Jan 31, 2013 at 8:04 pm
    I love Carlos's idea of running Go in a VM on a browser. I've had an idea
    floating around in the back of my head for a few months now that goes
    something like this:

    Is it possible to write a compiler that will compile a Go project into
    something that will run on the new Dart VM?

    I love the problem that Dart attempts to solve, like faster code execution
    than Javascript, faster loading time, etc. But I hate the language of Dart
    itself. Since Go is open source, and Dart is open source, wouldn't someone
    be able to connect the dots? I'd love to help out on a project like that,
    but I definitely couldn't lead it; I've spent way too much of my life in
    high level languages like Ruby and Javascript to know where to even start.

    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:05:42 AM UTC-5, Carlos Cobo wrote:

    You are right, it'd be a lot better to have a VM so anyone could make the
    language they want, no matter the paradigm (functional, imperative,
    whatever) but anytime I see that suggestion someone says that kills the
    openness of the web.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Scott Lawrence at Jan 31, 2013 at 8:16 pm

    On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Michael Schneider wrote:

    I love Carlos's idea of running Go in a VM on a browser. I've had an idea
    floating around in the back of my head for a few months now that goes
    something like this:

    Is it possible to write a compiler that will compile a Go project into
    something that will run on the new Dart VM?

    I love the problem that Dart attempts to solve, like faster code execution
    than Javascript, faster loading time, etc. But I hate the language of Dart
    itself. Since Go is open source, and Dart is open source, wouldn't someone
    be able to connect the dots? I'd love to help out on a project like that,
    but I definitely couldn't lead it; I've spent way too much of my life in
    high level languages like Ruby and Javascript to know where to even start.
    Does it make since to tie this effort to another language with dubious
    prospects, which will definitely have compatibility problems for several more
    years?

    I would guess the best path would be to start with a simple go-to-javascript
    translator. Getting go to run natively (even just on the dart vm) is a much
    more ambitious project, and is more likely to succeed if there's already a
    body of client web code written in go.
    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 8:05:42 AM UTC-5, Carlos Cobo wrote:

    You are right, it'd be a lot better to have a VM so anyone could make the
    language they want, no matter the paradigm (functional, imperative,
    whatever) but anytime I see that suggestion someone says that kills the
    openness of the web.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

    --
    Scott Lawrence

    go version go1.0.3
    Linux baidar 3.7.4-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jan 21 23:05:29 CET 2013 x86_64 GNU/Linux

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Michael Schneider at Jan 31, 2013 at 8:34 pm

    Does it make since to tie this effort to another language with dubious
    prospects, which will definitely have compatibility problems for several
    more
    years?

    I definitely agree that Dart's future is uncertain. But what I like about
    the idea is that there already is a VM out there and available (in Chrome
    Canary). I think a best case scenario would be if this project were a huge
    success, or even if other languages jump on the bandwagon of compiling to
    the VM, then the VM would live on in infamy even if the language of Dart
    fizzles out.

    I would guess the best path would be to start with a simple
    go-to-javascript
    translator. Getting go to run natively (even just on the dart vm) is a
    much
    more ambitious project, and is more likely to succeed if there's already a
    body of client web code written in go.

    I 100% agree. But only if the VM is the ultimate goal. Using a Go to JS
    translator as a daily workflow just adds another step and slows down the
    development process.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Scott Lawrence at Jan 31, 2013 at 8:39 pm
    On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Michael Schneider wrote:
    Does it make since to tie this effort to another language with dubious
    prospects, which will definitely have compatibility problems for several
    more
    years?

    I definitely agree that Dart's future is uncertain. But what I like about
    the idea is that there already is a VM out there and available (in Chrome
    Canary). I think a best case scenario would be if this project were a huge
    success, or even if other languages jump on the bandwagon of compiling to
    the VM, then the VM would live on in infamy even if the language of Dart
    fizzles out.

    I would guess the best path would be to start with a simple
    go-to-javascript
    translator. Getting go to run natively (even just on the dart vm) is a
    much
    more ambitious project, and is more likely to succeed if there's already a
    body of client web code written in go.
    I 100% agree. But only if the VM is the ultimate goal.
    Of course, eventually, the VM or some other form of native execution will
    eventually be necessary. But to get the ball rolling...
    Using a Go to JS
    translator as a daily workflow just adds another step and slows down the
    development process.
    I'd imagine a trivial webserver would take care of that, translating go to js
    on the fly if the web browser doesn't report (via accept headers or whatnot)
    that it's capable of running go natively.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

    --
    Scott Lawrence

    go version go1.0.3
    Linux baidar 3.7.4-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jan 21 23:05:29 CET 2013 x86_64 GNU/Linux

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Michael Schneider at Jan 31, 2013 at 8:58 pm
    Cool. I believe we're on the same page as far as that goes.

    I highly doubt there's someone on this mailing list who's such a huge Dart
    fan that they intimately know the it's VM's source code and could give me a
    good feasibility analysis of my idea....

    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 3:37:18 PM UTC-5, Scott Lawrence wrote:
    On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Michael Schneider wrote:


    Does it make since to tie this effort to another language with dubious
    prospects, which will definitely have compatibility problems for
    several
    more
    years?

    I definitely agree that Dart's future is uncertain. But what I like
    about
    the idea is that there already is a VM out there and available (in Chrome
    Canary). I think a best case scenario would be if this project were a huge
    success, or even if other languages jump on the bandwagon of compiling to
    the VM, then the VM would live on in infamy even if the language of Dart
    fizzles out.

    I would guess the best path would be to start with a simple
    go-to-javascript
    translator. Getting go to run natively (even just on the dart vm) is a
    much
    more ambitious project, and is more likely to succeed if there's
    already a
    body of client web code written in go.
    I 100% agree. But only if the VM is the ultimate goal.
    Of course, eventually, the VM or some other form of native execution will
    eventually be necessary. But to get the ball rolling...
    Using a Go to JS
    translator as a daily workflow just adds another step and slows down the
    development process.
    I'd imagine a trivial webserver would take care of that, translating go to
    js
    on the fly if the web browser doesn't report (via accept headers or
    whatnot)
    that it's capable of running go natively.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
    Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
    an email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

    --
    Scott Lawrence

    go version go1.0.3
    Linux baidar 3.7.4-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jan 21 23:05:29 CET 2013
    x86_64 GNU/Linux
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Dan Kortschak at Jan 31, 2013 at 9:25 pm
    One of these already exists. Archos has been a lone wolf on that for
    quite a while. There is also an LLVM for Go project that Andrew Wilkins
    has been working on. If you are interested in this kind of thing, it's
    probably best to contribute to these already existing projects.
    On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 15:14 -0500, Scott Lawrence wrote:
    I would guess the best path would be to start with a simple
    go-to-javascript
    translator. Getting go to run natively (even just on the dart vm) is a
    much
    more ambitious project, and is more likely to succeed if there's
    already a
    body of client web code written in go.

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Michael Schneider at Jan 31, 2013 at 9:39 pm
    I was aware of both projects.

    After reading through Dart's FAQ, I learned that the Dart VM was intended
    to be a language specific VM, while the PNaCL LLVM project is intended to
    the be their language *independent *project. So it appears to me that it's
    Andrew Wilkins who has the right approach. I hope his project stands the
    test of time.
    On Thursday, January 31, 2013 4:25:03 PM UTC-5, kortschak wrote:

    One of these already exists. Archos has been a lone wolf on that for
    quite a while. There is also an LLVM for Go project that Andrew Wilkins
    has been working on. If you are interested in this kind of thing, it's
    probably best to contribute to these already existing projects.
    On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 15:14 -0500, Scott Lawrence wrote:
    I would guess the best path would be to start with a simple
    go-to-javascript
    translator. Getting go to run natively (even just on the dart vm) is a
    much
    more ambitious project, and is more likely to succeed if there's
    already a
    body of client web code written in go.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Dan Kortschak at Jan 31, 2013 at 10:07 pm
    I hope others jump on board. I unfortunately don't have the skills for
    contributing to this.
    On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 13:39 -0800, Michael Schneider wrote:
    I hope his project stands the test of time.
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • John C. at Jan 31, 2013 at 7:09 pm
    FYI here was a similar discussion:
    https://groups.google.com/d/msg/golang-nuts/YksrbYM8iIE/MwSU7B71BTMJ
    On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:33:29 PM UTC-5, Carlos Cobo wrote:

    Given Go's amazing compiling speed, wouldn't be amazing to use it just
    like we use Javascript?

    I'm dreaming of Go inside Chromium (because of openness) with most of it's
    std libraries intact, some ones tweaked or even disabled (database?, net?,
    os, runtime, unsafe).

    "os" and "runtime" (maybe "net" too) can be made available via package
    "browser", with DOM manipulation, XHR, and all the new HTML5 APIs
    (LocalStore, QuerySelector, WebSockets, WebWorkers, Fullscreen, Pointer
    Lock, etc...).

    Obviously runtime would need some changes and go's toolchain may need some
    adapting too (go getting may be some kind of zip autopackaging, downloading
    and compiling feature).

    Loads of work but still a lot better than most of current Javascript
    things out there and also it'll a massive boost for Go.

    Javascript is a nice language but it's a clusterfuck of WAT<https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat>s
    and it's not getting any better.
    Nowadays you need like 80kb (jQuery 1.9 is actually 91kb) just for a
    library to get things right with most browsers.

    Ok, jQuery isn't required everywhere, you can use plain Javascript if you
    want, but then IE will come and you'll have nightmares.

    Why isn't better to use an already tested native language with dangerous
    capabilities off?

    Is this useful? Is it doable?
    Let me know what you think.

    Best regards,
    Carlos


    *P.D.*: I know there are some "alternatives" like Dart or TypeScript but
    it's still javascript with things on top (Dart is promising but I'd prefer
    Go in its place; Coffescript is just a transpiler with Ruby syntax, no
    thanks).
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-nuts @
categoriesgo
postedJan 29, '13 at 7:33p
activeJan 31, '13 at 10:07p
posts17
users9
websitegolang.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase