ISTM that we already provided a bunch of evidence, which you are rejecting. so "any evidence" clearly is not good enough and you should be a bit more specific.
Just to name a few specific examples of evidence provided: • The FAQ, as well as any interview of the question, have stated clearly that generics *may* be added, if a satisfying design is found. "May", not "will". • The proposal process <https://github.com/golang/proposal#the-proposal-process> clearly mentions the option to reject a proposal. • This push for including generics started simultaneously, using the same process <https://blog.golang.org/go2draft>, as both the "Error handling" and the "Error values" designs. "Error values" was accepted and "Error handling" was rejected as results of that process, so rejection was clearly a possible outcome. • Since then, there have been numerous blog posts, threads on this mailing list, talks at conferences and appearances on podcasts by the Go team. All of them mention the possibility that generics might not happen. All threads (that I'm aware of) publicly discussing generics discuss the option not to include them at all at least once. I really don't think it's too much to ask, what level of evidence you are actually looking for. I also strongly feel that the case made by us is stronger than the case made that there was no discussion about giving up on generics. The latter seems - as far as I can tell - mainly rely on a) interpreting statements by members of the Go team in ways incompatible with the actual words being said and b) speculating about the management process at Google - without any evidence to base this speculation on. On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:11 PM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What kind of proof would you find to be acceptable? Can you give an > example of something that I could say that you would consider to be a > good answer to that question? Thanks. > > Ian, seriously. ANY evidence please, which you think "proves" that there > was an open and public discussion on dropping generics from your daily > agenda and focusing and spending time on more important things, such as > first class Android support. > > ср, 17 мар. 2021 г. в 22:44, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org>: > >> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 4:28 AM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Can you provide any proof that there was an open public discussion? >> >> What kind of proof would you find to be acceptable? Can you give an >> example of something that I could say that you would consider to be a >> good answer to that question? Thanks. >> >> 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/CAEkBMfGnwhTuFHu0HvJrtymvWsazxAh-ijZYX%2BDjuV3L7FoukA%40mail.gmail.com.
