go-cmp VS golang-standards/project-layout

This made me think of a couple other interesting things:

1. you can change which algorithm is used in git diff as multiple are supported

https://luppeng.wordpress.com/2020/10/10/when-to-use-each-of...

2. Google has an edit graph implementation in Go in the cmp package

https://github.com/google/go-cmp/blob/master/cmp/internal/di...

Assertion libraries that people seem to love: - testify (my favorite) - go-cmp is a more barebones library - gotest.tools -- I have never used this but some swear by it

it uses https://github.com/google/go-cmp instead of reflect.DeepEqual

When I use functional arguments, I either prefix all of the options with the same prefix or put them in a dedicated package (like cmpopts) to help the IDE.

Checking for equality in tests: https://github.com/google/go-cmp

oklog/ulid to generate IDs. coreos/go-oidc for validating JWTs I get from auth. google/go-cmp for comparing structs in tests (unless the project is already using Testify). spf13/pflag because life's too short for Go's flag handling. getkin/kin-openapi for validating reqests/responses against my OpenAPI spec (in tests).

One thing to keep in mind about reflect.DeepEqual is because of the way it is implemented you could get positive results when the values are not actually the same, see this comment for reference.

cmd: here where we will leave the main.go that starts our app.

> https://github.com/golang-standards/project-layout

The name of the repo is really and intentionally misleading. rsc filled an issue there to point this out, but the repo maintainer just disabled issues altogether so now no one can see it.

Even when it would not have such parasitic name, many seasoned Go programmers, me included, consider the self-proclaimed "Standard Go project Layout" as the opposite of what is good and advisable.

Unfortunately, the name just works, so it is being recommended all over the Internet since its inception.

Your comment makes it look as if you're saying you hate the Go development team, but it seems that isn't the case.

I get a little of what you're saying, I wouldn't say I hate anyone, but I strongly dislike how a lot of projects are organized. I think a lot stems from https://github.com/golang-standards/project-layout , which pretended to be standard and was so (ab)used one of the creators opened an issue about it. If you look at the actual Go src, it's much, much cleaner.

So you don't get blind sided for self proclaimed "standards" that are not

I am writing a project that has two components: a CLI and a library. I've organised the project as follows (as per organisation instructions):

Familiarity with the standard Golang project structure, which you can find here.

I've been learning how to build web applications using different frameworks and languages for a while now, such as Laravel with its MVC architecture and Node.js following the 'Hapi.js Way'. As I'm trying to create a new portfolio project using Go, I found myself contemplating over the ideal project structure. I wanted something that not only aligns with the standard Go project layout, but also makes the code both easy to write and understand. That's when I stumbled upon the concept of Hexagonal Architecture, as showcased in Netflix's engineering blog. The idea of seamlessly swapping infrastructures with minimal code changes fascinated me, and I decided to implement it in my new project.