I agree with that. What exactly do you consider cryptic, though, about
my proposal? I thought the syntax was very clean. Furthermore,
regarding relating this to C++, I quote:
> Just to make it clear, you aren't allowed to use operators like +, -, <, call
> methods, or access struct fields of a generic value
I'm just not sure how your sentiment relates to the proposal.
št 30. 5. 2019 o 19:41 <lgod...@gmail.com> napísal(a):
>
> Sorry again for the power failure...let me try one last time
>
> one of the annoying things you have to deal with as a team member is being
> assigned an "update" of code written by someone who no longer works for the
> team.
> What makes this annoying is possibility of running into code sections that
> contain "crytic" statements that require lots of effort to understand.
> After looking at the link you provided, based on my history dealing with
> unnecessary and avoidable 'cryptic C++,
> my input is: Generics are a great idea EXCEPT when they allow use of
> cryptic syntax
>
> On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 12:29:03 PM UTC-4, Michal Strba wrote:
>>
>> Hi Gophers! :)
>>
>> I've been thinking about generics in Go 2 ever since the original contracts
>> proposal and few days ago, ideas finally clicked. One of the main things
>> about this proposal is that it deliberately omits the ability to restrict
>> the set of types a function can work with. This is a limitation, but I hope
>> to convince you that we can still do a vast majority of the things we were
>> missing, when we were missing generics.
>>
>> I'd love to share my proposal with you and engage in a good faith
>> conversation.
>>
>> Link to the proposal.
>>
>> Here's what the proposal covers:
>>
>> 1. Syntax of a new gen keyword.
>> 2. Generic functions.
>> 3. Unnamed generic arguments (a.k.a. a way to gve a type to the built-in new
>> function).
>> 4. Semantics of generic values (ability to use them as map keys, ...).
>> 5. Generic array lengths.
>> 6. Reflection and interface{}.
>> 7. Generic types (with two examples: List and Matrix).
>> 8. Generic methods and their limitations due to reflection.
>> 9. Generic interfaces.
>> 10. List of things this proposal can't do.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> faiface
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/4e266f34-32d8-4b3d-8f45-55da5651ed9e%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAO6k0usA%3D6EdH6mpTPqYnpnEBWNu8GST%2Bam-G2rQEZNPGUPC7A%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
