On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Axel Wagner <axel.wagner...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > The other day I had a lengthy conversation with Rog Peppe, David Crawshaw > and Nate Finch on twitter and I'd argue that neither of us would really > count as a Go-novice and we *still* weren't always clear what types certain > contracts allowed and excluded.
This does surprise me. I'm certainly too close to the problem, but to me it always seems quite clear which type arguments a contract allows and excludes. It's exactly the set of types that type check successfully. It's true that sometimes this can be a surprising type, but to me that seems just like the fact that it can be surprising which types implement an interface. What I agree is less clear is which generic function bodies are permitted by a given contract. That requires more thought. Ian -- 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.
