gosec VS golang-standards/project-layout

For those unaware, gosec (and by extension golangci-lint) will warn about uses of `math/rand`

https://github.com/securego/gosec/blob/d3b2359ae29fe344f4df5...

6. Gosec

You can (and definitely should!) also use gosec.

The crypto source in Go is great, no complaints there. Lints like gosec even recommend using it when generating crypto entropy. Go did a good job here, and I expect Rust will do the same sometime after getrandom reaches 1.0 so the API questions are settled, plus whatever makes sense for the future-proofing the standard library needs.

i think there's https://github.com/securego/gosec linter

Various static analysis tools are available for the Go language, and existing static analysis tools can check general best practices. For example, gosec is a tool to check secure Go coding, and I use it myself. However, coding rules in software development are not only based on best practices, but can also be software- or team-specific. For example

What's the difference between this a https://github.com/securego/gosec?

A github actions workflow is provided to run go fmt, vet, test and gosec. An initial configuration for dependabot is also provided.

Besides what was mentioned, we use : staticcheck.io and https://github.com/securego/gosec

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.