On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 3:21:26 PM UTC+8, Volker Dobler wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 29. September 2016 07:02:26 UTC+2 schrieb T L: >> >> I know of the syntax in spec. >> I just want to understand what is the deep reason for the syntax >> inconsistency between map index and type assert. >> > > "deep reason"s are found in religion and math not in > programming language design. > > A type assertion states "this has type x" which is a bold > statement, an assertion and these tend to fail/abort/terminate/throw > if violated in most languages. Also: What could be the possible > return value if the assertion failed? The zero value only. > Now think about how you would use x := foo.(bar) after a failed > type assertion. Basically impossible, a practically useless language > construct. Which in turn would force to allow the the x, ok = foo.(bar) > only. Now again you do have an "inconsistency" (whatever you mean > with this term) with map access which allows both forms. > > Btw: What do you think about the inconsistency between import > statements and for loops :-) ? > > V. >
If there are any inconsistencies between import statements and for loops, it is very natural for me. :) -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
