On 3/17/21 10:02 AM, Axel Wagner wrote: > When I look at the Go language feature page of TinyGo > <https://tinygo.org/lang-support/>, I don't think that GC is the only or > largest > hindrance to using it with normal Go programs. TBQH I'm always surprised that > people call it a Go implementation - it certainly uses Go syntax, but it's IMO > not even close to complete.
I'm actually happiest with the language part of GO. Not necessarily so much, the implementation. It has the potential to make me happy, anyway. "https://tinygo.org/lang-support/stdlib/"; > > > *Might* Generics adoption within the stdlib make more of it unusable > (assuming generics poses a problem, it might not). > > > No. Generics can be implemented as a purely compile-time feature > <https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/generics-implementation-stenciling.md>. So, like I said, if you avoid using parts of the stdlib. Or are you saying that existing parts of the stdlib will not migrate to using Generics. If Generics has any affect on the above link then I would have a conflict of interest in that I hope they would migrate generally in order to avoid empty interface use. -- 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/b91bf116-a23b-8fdf-468b-cb83897d0a5b%40gmail.com.
