> > Also, building a basic one yourself if you don't want to use those tends > to be exceptionally straightforward. >
Thanks for examples, i can't tell if they are experimental or viable for production use. But if it's that straightforward, why people complain about it too much. I implemented hash tables a billion times in C but i never complained about C's lack of map type. Because i understood the design choices and philosophy of C. I always dreamed a Ken Thompson version of C++, not necessarily an object oriented version of C but a more modern C. C with automatic memory management, better string handling etc, and still small and simple. Now we have it, and it's called Go (Thanks to Pike, Griesemer, Cox, Taylor and everyone). I love it because it's small, simple, modern and it maintains unix's and C's philosophy. It just hurts me to see people try to do it what they did to C++, add favorite feature of everyone. I know Go team is much smarter than me and Thompson is the creator of unix philosophy, i am confident that Go will stay as it is, a small simple, pragmatic and powerful language. Thanks. -- 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.
