83 points by TuanKiri 1 week ago | 12 comments
I based it on my past experience writing regular REST API servers and figured it might be useful or interesting to others as well.
timewizard 1 week ago
core.WeatherServices
Which makes sense because you're using a lot of things from core but since I have to carry the package name around everywhere I use it, outside of that module, it becomes a bit of a strain. weather.Service
Would clearly be a better name in the "go style," but the single level package structure always makes me feel like my types are dangling out in space outside of any decent hierarchy.I love Go as a language but I dislike how often it makes me think of exceptionally tiny things like this. Please don't read this as a criticism of your project just a general criticism of how thin the Go "namespace" ideology actually is.
9rx 1 week ago
It appears that it wanted to be services.WeatherService, which if reduced to service.Weather isn't looking so bad, but core ended up being introduced because the unnecessary interface already overloaded the namespace. The code doesn't accidentally highlight - it is crying out.
> always makes me feel like my types are dangling out in space
That's the idea, though, isn't it? Each package is its own distinct thing, intended to be useful and usable across many projects. There shouldn't be any kind of deep interconnectedness in most cases – and where there needs to be, you will typically place the related packages in a subfolder to communicate that relationship. I can't think offhand of any package manager that maintains anything other than a flat list of dependencies, and that's essentially what you are building here too.
I do think you have a point that many other ecosystems have a mindset where you are only building a single application with no attempt to find reusability beyond the immediate codebase. In large part because those languages/ecosystems require a bunch of extra, often complex, steps to make packages exportable. It can be a bit of mental shift to consider an application as a set of discrete, reusable parts if you come from those places.
angra_mainyu 1 week ago
Example: WeatherConfig, WeatherService, WeatherPollInterval => weather.*
maverwa 1 week ago
ricardobeat 1 week ago
You could have it respond with JSON, but then the rendering of the weather widget would have to be defined by the consumer instead of the tool server -- now the 'chat' part of your system needs to be aware of all possible content types, how to detect and render them; it's also doable but a different set of trade-offs.
maverwa 1 week ago
RamblingCTO 1 week ago
hagbarth 1 week ago
asabla 1 week ago
It's exactly what I was looking for
ivanvanderbyl 1 week ago