On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:51 PM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. > Okay. I can only repeat that "we are not going to add generics" was the most likely consequence of "we don't accept this design". So given that there was a discussion whether or not we want to accept this design (or what modification of it we might accept) constituted a discussion on if we want to add generics. That's the process for Go language development. There is a proposal and it either gets accepted or refined or rejected. Generics where no different in this regard - except maybe in the sense that there was more discussion than usual and the proposal was more thoroughly discussed and refined before being filed. But note that it's not uncommon for language changes to be discussed and refined before a proposal is filed either. > My main complaint is that I think what Go team is doing right now is > destructive and goes against Go core values, > So, AIUI, the core complaint is that they are disagreeing with you on this. That's understandably frustrating, but also a natural part and frequent outcome of discussions. It's not really a complaint that can be addressed, because if they agreed with you, someone else could have the same complaint about *not* adding generics. ISTM you just have to come to terms with the fact that not everyone will always agree with you. > 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/CAEkBMfGmsOSDShyb6ru%2BG2m8F8mxJZtKBFDR%3Dtx7ak2zBfEScg%40mail.gmail.com.
