在 2018年9月18日星期二 UTC+8下午7:29:37，Chris Hopkins写道：
>
> Pondering this, my concern is that it might become too powerful. I'm
> scared this will make it harder to work out what someone has done if
> there's too much indirection and magic added on top. It feels like it could
> be a really *really* big hammer.
>
> I don't buy the argument " those who prefer to avoid generics may do so
> and carry on as they are" because go is all about large projects and code
> reuse. If you enable people to write code that the average programmer can't
> understand, then IMO that is against the philosophy of what i thought go
> was.
>
+1. Go should not become another C++, of which different people or groups
use different subsets.
Knuth save me from people writing "clever" code.
>
> Chris
> On Tuesday, 18 September 2018 12:04:15 UTC+1, alan...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Although I respect the opinions expressed here, I think you might be
>> pleasantly surprised by how the proposed design would dovetail with the
>> rest of Go and make a number of things much more convenient than they are
>> at present.
>>
>> It would be nice, for example, to have a full range of collection types
>> in the standard library without the need to use interface{}, type
>> assertions and the performance overhead of 'boxing'.
>>
>> It's not an ugly design with angle brackets all over the place and most
>> of the time you'd hardly notice you were using a generic function as the
>> type parameter(s) would be automatically inferred from usage.
>>
>> Better still it would be compatible with Go 1.
>>
>> Admittedly, there's a lot of discussion over the design at present though
>> that's mainly about the constraint system. Everybody agrees that this needs
>> to be both simple and expressive though opinions differ over the best way
>> to achieve that.
>>
>> Anyway, as I said in another thread, the important thing is that the
>> existing built-in generic stuff is not interfered with, so those who prefer
>> to avoid generics may do so and carry on as they are. That way everybody
>> will be happy :)
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> On Monday, September 17, 2018 at 5:04:26 PM UTC+1,
>> jucie....@zanthus.com.br wrote:
>>>
>>> Go core team is working hard to bring generics to the language because
>>> several people asked for it. With all due respect for those users and for
>>> people working hard to make generics a reality, I feel that a greater
>>> number of people would suffer after generics adoption. So, I feel compeled
>>> to manifest my opinion: sorry guys, Go with generics will be worse than Go
>>> without generics.
>>>
>>> The language strives for simplicity since its inception and that is what
>>> attracted a large part of its user base. We must think about who we will
>>> want to have in our community 10 years from now. Supporting generics would
>>> please a minority to the detriment of a large number of potential users.
>>>
>>> Today Go is easy to learn and tools are easy to implement. Please keep
>>> it that way.
>>>
>>> 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.
