> (To be clear, your original claim was that there *was* no discussion - which is at least easy to address, because it's clearly not true. There was over three years of active discussion on this)
No, and I can repeat, there was no (public) discussion on whether the idea of generics in Go should be completely dropped. It *was* always a "discussion" of how to improve and implement generics in a Go way, but not of generics themselves as something to be avoided by all means. My main complaint is that I think what Go team is doing right now is destructive and goes against Go core values, such as simplicity over cleverness. And despite being claimed Go team doesn't know a way of improving language, other than adding features. вт, 16 мар. 2021 г. в 16:25, Axel Wagner <axel.wagner...@googlemail.com>: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 1:24 PM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That's absolutely up to you, but some of us (including myself) can't >> invest so much time because we have to earn money for living. >> > > As I said, I understand that reality. It is unfortunate, but given that > language design takes time and effort, I don't really know a better way to > do it, that makes it accessible to people who don't have those resources > available. > > >> I didn't ask for the poll, I just stated that there was no poll, as >> simple as that. >> > > While true, that makes your complaint even harder to understand to me. > If your complaint was that there should have been a poll, it would be > rooted in a true observation - there was none. And we could then talk about > why we don't believe polls are a good way to do language design. > If your complaint was that you didn't have time to participate in the > discussion, that's also rooted in a true observation. But I don't > understand what you would have expected the Go team to do about it. It is > hardly their fault that you are forced by the system we live in to > deprioritize Go language development. > (To be clear, your original claim was that there *was* no discussion - > which is at least easy to address, because it's clearly not true. There was > over three years of active discussion on this) > > I simply don't understand what you expected to happen. As I said, I don't > really know a way to include people that both a) dosen't require any time > on their part and b) isn't a poll, with all its methodological problems. > > >> >> >> >> >> вт, 16 мар. 2021 г. в 15:05, Axel Wagner <axel.wagner...@googlemail.com>: >> >>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 12:00 PM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> There is always a "discussion", most people (as well as I) will look >>>> only at the final version of proposal, if and when they have time. And >>>> what's the point of having formal proposals if you don't respect that >>>> process? Once you published, please notify everyone and give them time to >>>> come back with critics. Or just do what you do, but don't tell me or anyone >>>> that there is any "community" behind, "decade of discussion" and all that >>>> stuff. >>>> >>> >>> This seems very dismissive of the many members of the community which >>> *did* invest the time and energy to discuss the design for the past years. >>> When the contracts design was announced in 2018 >>> <https://blog.golang.org/go2draft>, the process was explained. >>> Including the fact that it is a draft, which will see several revisions, >>> that this process will likely take a couple of years and how we can >>> participate in it. Many of us have seen that announcement and understood it >>> for what it was and thus - even if (like me) they were opposed to the idea >>> of generics in Go - decided to participate in it to do their best to ensure >>> the outcome was a good design or a rejection. >>> >>> So, no offense, but I don't understand how you could in good faith argue >>> that the community was not involved, the process not respected or the >>> intention not announced. It was announced on the largest Go conference in >>> the world, accompanied by a blog post and several threads on golang-nuts >>> and golang-dev. With regular updates on the progress, again at most of the >>> large Go conferences, the blog, on this mailing list, several times on the >>> largest community-run Go podcast and in basically every medium I can think >>> of. >>> >>> If you didn't want or didn't have the time to participate in the >>> process, that's certainly unfortunate. But I believe it is fair to say that >>> the Go team went above and beyond to make the process as broadly accessible >>> and known as they can. >>> >>> And are you saying that "consensus" is how many emojis "up", "down" or >>>> "confused" were collected? You know that it's pretty easy to cheat with >>>> that system right? >>>> >>> >>> Not to point out the obvious, but you where the first person in this >>> thread to ask for a poll. And Ian has been pretty clear about the flaws of >>> that idea and that it's not how the Go project is run. >>> >>> Again, it is very hard to interpret your words and actions in good faith >>> here. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> вт, 16 мар. 2021 г. в 01:03, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org>: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:08 AM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > > For example, the multiple proposals that flowed out of >>>>> > >>>>> https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-error-handling-overview.md >>>>> . >>>>> > None of them have been adopted. >>>>> > >>>>> > I remember what was happening to "try" error handling proposal. It >>>>> was withdrawn only because of active resistance by the community. >>>>> > >>>>> > And what's happened to a new "generics" proposal, it also got a lot >>>>> of critics but was "accepted" in less than a month after formal >>>>> publication >>>>> on github. As Russ said "No change in consensus". What does it mean? Who >>>>> are these people who can change the consensus? How was it measured? A few >>>>> days after Russ locked it, so nobody can even say a word against it if >>>>> they >>>>> wanted. So it looks very much that company management learned from "try" >>>>> proposal. >>>>> >>>>> The design draft was put up for discussion for months before it became >>>>> a formal proposal. It was not new. >>>>> >>>>> The formal proposal (https://golang.org/issue/43651) got 1784 thumbs >>>>> up and 123 thumbs down (and ten "confused"). Yes, there were critics. >>>>> But I think it is fair to say that the proposal has far more >>>>> supporters than critics. >>>>> >>>>> The "no change in consensus" comment refers to the discussion after >>>>> the proposal was moved to "likely accept" status: >>>>> https://github.com/golang/go/issues/43651#issuecomment-772744198. >>>>> After it was marked as "likely accept", there was no change to the >>>>> consensus that it should be accepted. (Note that the "likely accept" >>>>> comment got 60 thumbs up and 0 thumbs down (and one "confused").) >>>>> >>>>> None of this is anything like the "try" proposal >>>>> (https://golang.org/issue/32437), which had 318 thumbs up and 794 >>>>> thumbs down (and 132 "confused"). >>>>> >>>>> 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/CADKwOTcReE-U33VL8sRmjg6Pc%3D05c_xGWHyGk9iEF%3Deh1e4Kxw%40mail.gmail.com.
