The 4-chan Go programmer

Use of chan chan and higher-order channel patterns

• Several commenters note that “channel of channel” is a normal Go pattern:
  • Sending a reply channel with a request (RPC/actor style).
  • Implementing promise/future-like semantics.
  • Pub/sub systems and thread pools where workers send back a result channel.
  • Dynamic dispatch and asynchronous tree/FS walks.
• Typically this is chan struct{… reply chan T …} rather than a literal chan chan.
• Most report never needing more than two levels; chan chan chan is seen as vanishingly rare or unnecessary.
• Some argue the blog’s example is parody-level complexity; others say multiple layers of channels are analogous to chained pointers and can be fine if properly abstracted.

Over-engineering, indirection, and interfaces

• Many complain about code where a simple operation passes through multiple “interface” functions or wrapper layers, often in different files.
• This is attributed to:
  • Premature abstraction (“just in case we change it later”).
  • Pattern cargo-culting from Java/C# “interface everything” culture.
  • Frameworks/Clean Architecture/SOLID taken to extremes, yielding “ravioli code” or Law-of-Demeter chains.
• Others defend indirection when:
  • It supports testing, reuse, or company-wide architectural consistency.
  • Backwards-compatible public APIs need stable abstractions.
• Consensus: abstraction should be justified by actual needs; simplicity and readability are strong virtues.

Concurrency design and channel vs mutex/waitgroup

• Some view misuse of channels as a hallmark of over-eager or inexperienced Go developers:
  • Using channels where a direct call, mutex, or waitgroup would be simpler.
  • Exposing channels in public APIs without clear benefit.
• Others prefer channels to shared-memory primitives, citing clearer invariants and Go’s “share memory by communicating” guidance.
• Multiple people stress that:
  • Channels can deadlock too and invite complex actor-style designs that are hard to debug.
  • A good heuristic is to ask whether concurrency truly pays for its added complexity.

Design patterns, education, and “taste”

• Commenters describe education heavy on patterns (GoF, Clean Architecture) applied to toy problems, encouraging over-abstraction.
• Stories are shared where deliberately avoiding patterns produced simpler, better solutions, even in academic settings.
• Several emphasize “taste” in abstraction:
  • It develops only with experience and by suffering through both under- and over-designed systems.
  • Teams should tolerate stylistic differences as long as code remains clear and correct.

4chan pun and off-topic tangent

• Some readers initially expect a connection to the 4chan site; others point out the title is just a wordplay on chan chan chan chan.
• There’s a brief digression into an unrelated internet personality with the same phonetic name, generally characterized as disturbing and irrelevant to Go or the article.