On Saturday, 8 September 2018 06:19:09 UTC+2, Lucio wrote:
> What my uneducated eye sees at the core of the proposed contracts is a > new, extended approach to defining *types*, that assigns categories to them > (classes, of course) based - as interfaces are, for user-defined types - > on methods we call "operators" and operations on such extended "categories". > > Again, hoping to clarify a very muddy concept: what does the implicit contract on generic operator "+" look like in the Go2 proposal? I believe whatever the proposal, it must be able to express the properties and restrictions that apply to each predefined operator. Once you look at generics in such light, the generics picture changes dramatically. But I do confess that I'm hoping some of the luminaries here can see beyond my vision, for I can't see what the full picture really looks like. I actually think I will enjoy standing on the shoulder of *those* giants - I heartily disliked C++'s templates, I stopped using the language just about when they appeared. :-) Lucio. -- 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.
