Yes, an alternative syntax I can come up with (underscore as a placeholder):
func Foo(type T1 _, T2 Bar)
On Thursday, 18 June 2020 03:28:39 UTC+1, Andrey Tcherepanov wrote:
>
> Wouldn't it be nice to have just
>
> func Foo(type T1, type T2 Bar)
>
> (type as keyword splitting it into 2 type declarations)
>
> On Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at 5:50:47 AM UTC-6, Brian Candler wrote:
>>
>> Consider a generic where you want T1 unconstrained but T2 constrained.
>> If you write
>>
>> func Foo(type T1, T2 Bar)
>>
>> then Bar constrains both. Hence the need for
>>
>> func Foo(type T1 interface{}, T2 Bar)
>>
>
--
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/ad8aee78-8e12-4dcf-8067-60062e782102o%40googlegroups.com.
