Jon Bodner @[email protected]

Anyone working at Twitter who doesn’t want to enable fascism and feels they can’t leave, reach out to me on mastodon and I’ll help forward your resume around. Hope others will do the same.

I've removed my Twitter address from my GitHub account. Until GitHub supports Mastodon natively, I've put my Mastodon address in the location field. I will ask O'Reilly to remove Twitter from future printings of "Learning Go". GitHub.com/jonbodner #golang #learning #go

@ZanMcQuade Followed

Keep in touch: Electronic mail: smcquade@oreilly.com 🐘: @zanmcquade@tilde.zone Insta: @therockstumbler

Thought I’d give Mastodon a try since the ship is clearly sinking here. If you’ve got questions, comments, complaints, or praise for “Learning Go”, reach out to me at @jonbodner@noc.social

@ink_punctuation @inyongkim10 Glad you like the book!

@inyongkim10 Learning Go 입니다. aladin.co.kr/m/mproduct.asp…

Golang 공부하면서 참 좋다고 생각하는 부분..

@_aijaz_ Thanks! I’m glad you like the book.

@johnnyaustin Let me know if you have any questions.

@johnnyaustin Excellent!

@johnnyaustin I can send you a PDF of my book…

@HandstandSam Did it help?

I just allocated 6144m of Ram to Android Studio.

@bufferings Thank you!

Learning Go 読み終わった。とても良い本だったな。もういっかいさらっと読んで終わりにしよっと。

@bufferings to refine or remove in the second edition. You can use adapters to wrap third-party structs, but you can do the same in Java with objects.

@bufferings 3. You are absolutely right that depending on structs (or other concrete types) defined by third parties is as much of a dependency as depending on an interface defined by a third party. You found a very weak argument in the book that I need...

Learning Go の Interface のところ、わからんなぁ。いったん全部読んだあとに、なんか別の本も見てみようかな。

@danluu I hope this isn't true for my book, "Learning Go." I put a lot of thought into chapter order and concepts. Mistakes and changes are inevitable, so O'Reilly published a revised first edition to update the chapter on generics and to fix errors. I'm writing a second edition now.

so you have to regularly skip forward to understand the current section, etc. I can see how it would be difficult to edit a book and not have these kinds of errors sneak in, but that doesn't mean I would, without caveats, recommend a book with these kinds of errors.

I wonder how many people read the programming books they strongly recommend. E.g., with language intro books, the median highly recommended text has many examples that don't work with the version of the language the book allegedly uses, introduces concepts in the wrong order,