Just a note on your rationale for why not to use <: :> : "... requires more typing." Golang has, rather famously, never shied away from making developers type more. The reason it hasn't, as far as I understand, is that code is read far often than it is written, and so the extra verbosity is worth the ease in reading the code. IMHO, that principle very much applies here. The *readability* of the syntax should be a far more important consideration than whether there is an extra character in the syntax.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:14:31 AM UTC-4 Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:21 PM Ahmed (OneOfOne) W. <oneo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > This feels a little better, but honestly I'm still all for angle > brackets or like Watson suggested, guillamets. > > > > fn(T1)(fn2(T2)(fn3(T3)(v))) // 1 > > fn[T1](fn2[T2](fn3[T3](v))) // 2 > > fn<T1>(fn2<T2>(fn3<T3>(v))) // 3 > > fn«T1»(fn2«T2»(fn3«T3»v))) // 4 > > > > To me, with a background in C++ and Typescript and a little bit of Rust, > #3 and #4 are just natural and easier to read. > > The advantage of parentheses is that the language already uses > parentheses for lists in various places. Of course that is also the > disadvantage. > > When considering something other than parentheses, I encourage people > to look for objective reasons why one syntax is better than another. > It's going to be different from other aspects of the language. So > what reason would we have for preferring one syntax over another? > > For example: > > Robert already gave reasons why square brackets are better than angle > brackets. > > The disadvantage of guillemets is that they are hard to type on many > keyboards. So to me either square brackets or angle brackets would be > better than guillemets. > > The disadvantage of a two character sequence such as <: :> is that it > is more typing. So again either square brackets or angle brackets > seem to me to be better. > > An example of a reason that square brackets might be a poor choice > would be ambiguous parsing, or cases where the code is harder to read. > > It's true that some other languages use angle brackets, but Go already > does many things differently. That is only a minor advantage for > angle brackets. To me at least it does not outweigh the > disadvantages. > > In short, please try to provide reasons for a different syntax. "It > looks good" is a valid reason, but please try to explain why it looks > better than square brackets or parentheses. > > Thanks. > > 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/985c8685-484c-417c-a421-fe7a222d56c7n%40googlegroups.com.
