That's fair enough; it's a language you're more confident with. I've spent two years doing Go regularly now, and at the moment I can whip up valid Go code without tooling or running it in between, but it took me a good amount of time and practice.
> As a corollary, I still haven't been able to understand Go modules and the way code is supposed to be laid out!
I also believe these are the biggest challenges in the Go ecosystem at the moment, and it's probably the most frequently asked question in the various communities. Code / codebase layout is still a very opinionated thing, and while there's a handful of good ideas, there's no standard. (on that note, ignore the "golang-standards" github account, those are NOT standards).
> Code / codebase layout is still a very opinionated thing
And will remain so, because there simply is no silver bullet. Does it sometimes make sense to have a "cmd" directory? Absolutely. Does it sometimes make sense to have every subcomponent live its own package? Yes.
That's fair enough; it's a language you're more confident with. I've spent two years doing Go regularly now, and at the moment I can whip up valid Go code without tooling or running it in between, but it took me a good amount of time and practice.
> As a corollary, I still haven't been able to understand Go modules and the way code is supposed to be laid out!
I also believe these are the biggest challenges in the Go ecosystem at the moment, and it's probably the most frequently asked question in the various communities. Code / codebase layout is still a very opinionated thing, and while there's a handful of good ideas, there's no standard. (on that note, ignore the "golang-standards" github account, those are NOT standards).