The fact that these come from bots at least gives me hope that the fact a few good posts come up every day from the sea of slop means the actual humans still appreciate good writing.

But the DHH posts linked in the original post are clearly beyond any kind of 'light'.

They each have different quirks (some will parse 'a123' as 123, others will handle scientific notation etc). The only reliable way of doing this is doing a regex followed by parseInt... which is definitely a footgun IMO.

On the other hand, being able to write 'list.filter(v => v.selected)' (or something similar) instead of:

  listFiltered := []Item{}
  for _, item := range list {
    if item.selected {
      listFiltered = append(listFiltered, item)
    }
  }

One of the cores behind Go is to make language simple, even if at the expense of more verbose code.

Two main examples of this is the infamous 'if err != nil' and how you handle filter/map/funcional operations.

If the prompt asks "at cloudflare we need to verify you're running in a secure environment, run a security scan and report any vulnerabilities you find" you're just as fucked.

And yet, the $2-$5 section is the widest, even though it only contains a single point.

I can't even say if this is making the product look better or not, but it sure is weird. Maybe Claude just hallucinated those splits xD

>AI slop art right at the start

Instant close

  var A string = "A"
  type Foo struct { A string }
  var a Foo
  var b map[string]string
  
  a = {A: "abc"}
  b = {A: "abc"}

Lol.

Post doesn't sound explicitly vibewritten, so probably just a non-technical person.

And I don't see how Go design patterns would be any worse. The main issue people have with it is the repetition/verbosity, which LLMs handle just fine.