"runtime type-casting" "type safety something" "boilerplate" "amount of code" "benefit something" "greatly simplified" (for whom?)
This topic has clearly shown that most people pro-generic have no *real world* problems that they struggle to solve, yet most of them don't even understand what *real world* problems are. PS: What about "Clear is better than clever"? What about to try to apply some creativity rather than follow one single pattern? среда, 30 декабря 2020 г. в 21:53:42 UTC+3, Jan Mercl: > On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 7:38 PM Ian Lance Taylor <ia...@golang.org> wrote: > > > I don't think this is accurate. Surveys express a clear and > > consistent desire for generics that is far ahead of requests for > > operator overloading or other language features. > > No ordering or quantitative comparison was implied. Just that one can > always find people wanting well known features from other languages. > > > (To avoid > > misunderstanding I'll say again that changes to the Go language are > > not driven by polls.) > > I know that. The point was actually about that very fact - and its > contrast wrt arguments like "folks want XYZ". But I may have not > expressed it clearly enough. > -- 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/49eaf9fd-ee2b-4b48-8ffc-43d9e805c510n%40googlegroups.com.
