I generally agree with you about UIs (if by shit you mean they've thrown away a ton of utility), but I don't think his video was bs, maybe just moved too far from it's original context.
DB engine appears to be sqlite. It's in the tags on the main page and there's a file full of sql to create what looks like a sample db in the data/ dir.
It seems more along the lines of a "headless CMS", which is basically just extensible CRUD often with API endpoints; compare it to Strapi. This one looks finished enough to play around with at least.
Choosing to name variables with a single character has nothing to do with syntax. At most it could be considered idiomatic, but there's no reason to slavishly follow every idiomatic choice, just as there isn't in natural language.
I appreciate your write-up, it was well done. How long did you spend on this? I'd be most interested to know how long, not counting writing the blog post.
I'm NOT trying to show that Go is faster than async/await or anything similar. I'm showing that nested async/await calls are incredibly expensive compared to regular nested function calls.
You need to add to go keyword to change a normal function to a goroutine.
If you would remove async/await and Task/Return from the C# code example, it would perform pretty much the same as Go.
If you want to show that async/await calls are expensive, than you should have shown two code samples of C#, one with async/await, and one without.
Or could have done the same for Go, show one example with goroutines, and one without.
But I think everyone already know that async/await and goroutines has it's costs.
The problem is more that you are comparing Go without goroutines (without it's allocation costs) to a C# example with a poor implementation of async/await.
reply