Nah. To me, these are fine. They are both topical to Go and discuss novel aspects of Go programming, and are written fairly infrequently. I for one appreciate them and have learned about important topics like eBPF from them. They seems like appropriate use of go-nuts to me.
I could wish the articles didn't use AI without fact checking... but meh, humans make plenty of mistakes too. On Sunday, July 26, 2026 at 6:42:25 AM UTC-3 Duncan Harris wrote: I think you probably need to stop posting these articles to this group. It is not scalable. People will get annoyed. On Friday, 24 July 2026 at 23:02:37 UTC+1 Cheikh Seck wrote: Go 1.26's runtime/secret (GOEXPERIMENT=runtimesecret) tags allocations inside secret.Do(f) for erasure — the right layer to stop secrets leaking into crash core dumps. Key takeaway: it marks, doesn't wipe — you must call runtime.GC() right after or you still leak, and it's a no-op off linux/amd64+arm64. I built a reproducible harness (canary → SIGSEGV → scan the core): control leaks, secret doesn't. Repo + Dockerfile: https://github.com/cheikh2shift/go-snippets/tree/main/secret-demo Writeup: https://towardsdev.com/runtime-secret-go-1-26s-answer-to-secrets-leaking-in-core-dumps-d884615e971f -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/775db07b-8e90-4855-8850-b0701b2fdca7n%40googlegroups.com.
