One of the things I miss the most in Go is polymorphism. I must confess that the lack of polymorphism is one of those things that still annoys me sometimes.
Last week covered a lot of ground but that articled linked last week did not cover another aspect of Go that might bite you.
When I was going over my old posts from January 2009 I had a flashback of how I for a while aimed at posting something every other day. Today I must say quality may have suffered from that and I apologize... So here are the highlights...
Learning how to write "good" go code (in some definition of good) sometimes mean you need to unlearn old habits. This is especially true when it comes to asynchronous code if you have a C# background.
When writing Go code the general guideline is not to create interfaces unless it is really needed. A good example would be an interface with only one concrete implementation. Now for the mind boggling part; in C# we would probably create that interface if the type needs to be faked in some test while in Go you wouldn't. Or actually you would. But in a different place...
Before you go crazy on me screaming that making code testable for the sake of testability is bad I'd like to agree. However testable code have other nice properties like loose coupling for example - something you likely want. Anyway, in this article there is a great comparison between using inheritance vs composition to implement a class and how that affects both the design of the class and the tests. TL/DR; use composition and dependency injection. Please.
As part of on boarding my new job the IAT was mentioned. And then when I attended some social engineering talks at DefCon a few weeks ago a comment was made that in order to be a good social engineer you also need to know yourself.