Does this generics guide you into good design?
What exact problems does it exactly solve for you?

For me, it is overall freedom question.
Let's the choice to the persons that want to use generics or not.
why to reject this generic feature if we can add it as orthogonal thing
without harmful impacts on other things (e.g. compilation time and so on).


Le mercredi 11 novembre 2015 09:18:47 UTC+1, Egon a écrit :
Does this generics guide you into good design?
What exact problems does it exactly solve for you?

a generics solution must handle both "generic algorithms" and "generic
data structures".
Also, here the restrictions part is too long -- it shows that it doesn't
fit well with current design of Go.

+ Egon
On Wednesday, 11 November 2015 03:47:10 UTC+2, Bjarke Ebert wrote:

I'm sure there are many different opinions about how Go could have

In my opinion generic functions are the most needed kind of generics. It
is easier to do without generic types than without generic functions.
Furthermore, the former probably implies the latter, so a minimal way to
start is with generic functions.
I have written down my idea about the simplest possible way to add
generic functions to Go.


Comments are very welcome.

(disclaimer: I work at Google but I'm not involved in the Go project, and
I post this as myself not as Google)
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 golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 6 of 27 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-nuts @
postedNov 11, '15 at 1:46a
activeNov 14, '15 at 7:21p



site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase