On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 2:36 PM Kevin Chadwick <m8il1i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > *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. No, I am saying that your assumptions that generics pose a problem is wrong. There is no technical reason that would prevent the authors of TinyGo to implement them, without too much trouble. Certainly far less trouble than other language features they already support. AIUI that's also the answer you got from them, so I don't understand the confusion. > 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 > . > -- 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/CAEkBMfGm7YRpgce5qBZQ7S8nok4ib90Cerjo3rA%2BfaGFy%3DN0Zw%40mail.gmail.com.
