internally uses the same root command btw. in fact this recently changed for Tahoe (as the article mentions).
started out as a shell script but switched to a go binary (which is what is linked).
internally uses the same root command btw. in fact this recently changed for Tahoe (as the article mentions).
started out as a shell script but switched to a go binary (which is what is linked).
I hope this doesn't become a trend. Moving it to go means you need to compile it before you run it, or blindly run an uninspected binary from some random guy
It's not like the performance of this could have motivated it
I'll take the minimal hassle of having to compile a go program over a complex shell script that only the author understands (if that) any day.
Performance isn't everything; readability and maintainability matter too.
> Performance isn't everything; readability and maintainability matter too.
Is that case for this vibe-coded thing? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45513562
No idea, I haven't had a look at this code in particular.
I'm just saying that I've seen several "small tools that could have been shell scripts" in Go or another more structured language and never wished they were shell scripts instead.
I mean, you shouldn't blindly run a shell script anymore than a binary anyways. And if you're reading the code I'd rather read Go than bash any day. That said, yes there is an extra compilation step.