What Go Might Be Like With Generics
play.golang.org
What Go Might Be Like With Generics
1–10 of 49 posts
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#2tl;dr:
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#3It is undeniable that generics are a quite demanded feature for golang.
We'll see how the language evolves, but I can't see them coming for a "long" time.
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#4errible to my eyes.
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#5is this trying to solve a particular problem or just pandering to the "... but generics!" crowd of trolls?
because it doesn't look like it's solving anything, it feels positively ugly, and there's no way we'll every shut those people up no matter how hard we try. there's no generics solution that will do that.
thankfully go's authors don't usually favour the internet's opinion on these matters, or we'd be dealing with something even uglier now.
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#6Is the only argument that Go users can come up with against generics is that they don't like the syntax? The pretentious nature of the Go community really puts me off from the language, especially when combined with some of the pretentious designs of Go itself.
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#7is this trying to solve a particular problem or just pandering to the "... but generics!" crowd of trolls? because it doesn't look like it's solving anything, it feels positively ugly, and there's no way we'll every shut those people up no matter how hard we try. there's no generics solution that will do that. thankfully go's authors don't usually favour the internet's opinion on these matters, or we'd be dealing wit…
People who want generics, to solve real problems, in Go are trolls?
Gosh that word has lost all meaning at this point.
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#8Is the only argument that Go users can come up with against generics is that they don't like the syntax? The pretentious nature of the Go community really puts me off from the language, especially when combined with some of the pretentious designs of Go itself.
Is the only argument that Go users can come up with against generics is that they don't like the syntax?
Surely that's the best argument?
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#9It is undeniable that generics are a quite demanded feature for golang. We'll see how the language evolves, but I can't see them coming for a "long" time.
I fully support language specialization -- that is kinda the point, it all ends up bits in the end. Rust is a completely different animal than Go yet I think both are awesome!
The idea that all languages have to cater to all people is silly. Generics are ALWAYS a trade-off. None is hard for developers, C++ style is terrible for compile (tons of code-gen, macro crap, duplication, de-duplication stages), and Java style (box-box-box-box) is slow at runtime.
The misunderstanding that generics are free and there lack of inclusion was an oversight rather than a choice is misguided. The Go team aren't fresh faced neophytes, they move with purpose.
Additionally -- if you want lots of features, there are LOTS of ways great languages for you! Leave the small, crazy cadre of people who don't mind C, think Lua is awesome and think Go is great to their (own) devices, we will be OK.
Re: What Go Might Be Like With Generics
#10Is the only argument that Go users can come up with against generics is that they don't like the syntax? The pretentious nature of the Go community really puts me off from the language, especially when combined with some of the pretentious designs of Go itself.
No, the argument is that it's unclear how to fit it into the language.
Typically, generics are implemented using either code generation (causing code bloat) or type erasure (which requires boxing the type). They're not satisfied with either.