stripe-go

All I can give is my experience (been coding professionally for maybe 12-15 years) but I never looked at patterns like you are for a LONG time. I had no choice but to code in a "simple, straightforward" style because I didn't know anything fancy. I just did everything the normal, dumb way. That said, things often become complicated because you don't have the skills to keep them simple (for example, you draw the boundaries between your modules wrong, or you fail to abstract the right things, leading to tight coupling and information leaking). So it's pretty normal for your software to be a mess for the first decade or so. You should just keep writing your project, and as you find as the developer certain things on it are harder than they should be / frustrating / take too long, that will indicate a problem. Then you can keep trying to refa

Unfortunately my experience has been different; I found that Stripe's Go doc doesn't match their API and while searching on it I found that someone else had mentioned that to their personnel over freenode 2 years ago. So I raised an issue on GitHub[1] on Apr 9 and hasn't been attended to yet. On a more serious note, Stripe's payment links doc seemed to imply that tax rates are automatically calculated if the tax rates are set(as we do with code when we pass the tax_id), But I found after couple of payments that tax aren't being charged, On conversing on Twitter with the payment links dev I came to realize that the required option was not there for me[2] and then after couple of hours with their support staff I was informed that the options was not available for India as 'Stripe Tax' is a separate product. Overall, I'm happy with Stripe's

A nice feature of keeping the idempotency key separate from the payload is that a service like Stripe can build tools to help users with idempotency even if the user has no idea what an idempotency key is. For example, take a look at stripe-go's implementation, which automatically tags a request with a key if the user didn't specify one: https://github.com/stripe/stripe-go/blob/67034d2205c0240ade9... This works for all mutating requests, and is useful because the built-in retry system will automatically reuse the same key that was generated. Users can get the benefits of idempotency without really having to understand very well what's going on under the hood. I suppose you could still do that by munging each request body, but IMO it's a nice feature to make sure that requests are the same as what the user specified. Also note that in prac

> What if those people or organisations have a lot of repositories and they want to use a naming convention that reflects that maybe, just maybe, only a subset of their code is written in Go? I'm not sure I understand how that's an argument in itself for using "go-" or "-go" (or some other version) in a package name. It results in a lack of clarity in how to reference the package: the hypothetical "github.com/stripe/stripe-go" import path probably (and almost certainly) introduces the "stripe" package name, but the the discordance between what you write as an import statement and by what name the package is referenced is unconventional and strange. There are certainly times when it makes sense. And I agree with the idea that an organization, in most cases, shouldn't come up with a unique name for the Go implementation of, say, an API wrap