Generics enabled by default in Go tip • Hacker News Board

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#31

Post by tengbretson » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:33 AM UTC

Taek wrote: post #21

puddingforears wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you write a singly linked list who’s contents are arbitrary? What if you were to map a function over it? Say you want to use this data structure with third-party objects? How do you do that right now?

Find a different way to solve the problem. I've written close to half a million lines of code in Go and the lack of generics has been a pain point in maybe 1% of that? Usually, if you are thinking about generics you are reaching for abstraction when you don't need to be. If you really need generic structures you can use the interface type but generally there's a simpler solution that doesn't require generics.

Maybe you could have gotten that work done with fewer than 500,000 loc if you used a language with a better feature set.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#32

Post by VirusNewbie » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:33 AM UTC

Taek wrote: post #21

puddingforears wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you write a singly linked list who’s contents are arbitrary? What if you were to map a function over it? Say you want to use this data structure with third-party objects? How do you do that right now?

Find a different way to solve the problem. I've written close to half a million lines of code in Go and the lack of generics has been a pain point in maybe 1% of that? Usually, if you are thinking about generics you are reaching for abstraction when you don't need to be. If you really need generic structures you can use the interface type but generally there's a simpler solution that doesn't require generics.

Probably a bunch of that code was needless boilerplate you could have gotten away with not writing if you had abstractions such as parametric polymorphism.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#33

Post by _wldu » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:34 AM UTC

mountainriver wrote: post #25

_wldu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree about placating. Go is fine as it is. I don't need or want generics, but the addition of generics won't stop me from using Go.

I didn’t need generics till I wrote a mathematical library, and wow they would be handy

I've used templates in C++ to do that and I agree that it is handy. I had to write far fewer functions than I would have without them. Sometimes, it's nice to not care or worry about how many bits are in a number.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#34

Post by tedunangst » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:34 AM UTC

Every HN thread about go: go is useless because it lacks generics.

Go adds generics.

HN thread: I don't want this.

Good case study about the people drawn to comment on a topic.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#35

Post by nerdwaller » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:36 AM UTC

silisili wrote: post #9

Not to be contrary for its sake, but I'll say this is one change I'm really not happy about. I feel like it's a change to placate many, while driving a lesser amount away. Which is fine, but still feels like the end of something, as I am one of the aforementioned 'lesser.' As for why...I love above most the simplicity and readability of Go. Any change which encroaches that, which this does, is a net negative to me.

I fully agree, after writing go for the last 7 years. I recognize that generics solve some problems, but there’s a cost in doing so. In that period I’ve had only a few cases where I wish I was back in a language with this feature (Java being my previous typed language), however most of the time the interface with an application specific data model was more than sufficient. Obviously you need to wrap that abstraction for typesafe code, but that’s pretty trivial.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#36

Post by bouncycastle » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:36 AM UTC

puddingforears wrote: post #17

silisili wrote: post #9

Not to be contrary for its sake, but I'll say this is one change I'm really not happy about. I feel like it's a change to placate many, while driving a lesser amount away. Which is fine, but still feels like the end of something, as I am one of the aforementioned 'lesser.' As for why...I love above most the simplicity and readability of Go. Any change which encroaches that, which this does, is a net negative to me.

How would you write a singly linked list who’s contents are arbitrary? What if you were to map a function over it? Say you want to use this data structure with third-party objects? How do you do that right now?

Singly linked lists are something from CS1 where you learn about data structures. You rarely use them in practice. In most cases slices and maps do the job fine.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#37

Post by silisili » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:36 AM UTC

tedunangst wrote: post #34

Every HN thread about go: go is useless because it lacks generics. Go adds generics. HN thread: I don't want this. Good case study about the people drawn to comment on a topic.

Or good case study of squeaky wheels. I never wanted generics. I never thought to spam the development lists about how much I liked how things were going.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#38

Post by leshow » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:38 AM UTC

Taek wrote: post #21

puddingforears wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you write a singly linked list who’s contents are arbitrary? What if you were to map a function over it? Say you want to use this data structure with third-party objects? How do you do that right now?

Find a different way to solve the problem. I've written close to half a million lines of code in Go and the lack of generics has been a pain point in maybe 1% of that? Usually, if you are thinking about generics you are reaching for abstraction when you don't need to be. If you really need generic structures you can use the interface type but generally there's a simpler solution that doesn't require generics.

It's not as if it's a niche problem requiring a niche solution though. The problem is "how do I write my own data structures" and to the best of my knowledge Go's answer is: copy-paste everything and edit for each concrete type, use code gen, or pay runtime cost for interfaces. All of those solutions seem more complex than just having a type parameter.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#39

Post by deanCommie » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:45 AM UTC

silisili wrote: post #22

puddingforears wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you write a singly linked list who’s contents are arbitrary? What if you were to map a function over it? Say you want to use this data structure with third-party objects? How do you do that right now?

You don't write singly linked lists of arbitrary data :). In my 20+ years of development, I've definitely realized everyone's brains and approaches work differently.

You do if you want your language to have a reusable Linked List data structure so that everyone doesn't have to re-implement their own version of it for each content type.

Re: Generics enabled by default in Go tip

#40

Post by durbatuluk » Sat, Aug 21, 2021, 4:46 AM UTC

If you want all features of language X (I doubt we will stop at generics) use language X. Stop trying to make all languages the same.

I work with programmers from OO background (java) and they can't even grasp the utility of functions as value or closures. Every damn "service" has an interface/generated mock and anemic model. They're desperate waiting for generics for go to "complete".

I fear the influx of OO programmers.