Generics support a library handling type-safe registry services. Using such a library will not require advanced generics understanding.
> On Mar 19, 2021, at 11:53 AM, cpu...@gmail.com <cpui...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 1:53:30 PM UTC+1 ren...@ix.netcom.com wrote: >> One other point on this. Generics will be trivial for 95% of the people - >> they will only need to be able to read and write the instantiation >> statements of type safe collections. >> >> Most developers don’t write the generic implementations - these are provided >> by library authors. > > That is an unsupported claim. I've waited for Go to have generics for the > simple case of having compile time type safety of registry patterns instead > of copying my code x times for resorting to go:generate. It just makes life > much easier. > >> As I’ve said before, I would of taken a more go-like approach - generics >> seem too technical for most go developers - but in the end they will be a >> net benefit. > > The community has tuned and chosen the approach. The discussion of type > params imho proves that "no good" designs are iterated until they are > acceptable to a majority. You can support these discussions. > > Cheers > -- > 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/56ebe8cc-ab0d-40d4-b478-a7bc92bc321an%40googlegroups.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/E4160BF2-68C9-4070-81DF-3699705EFD8A%40ix.netcom.com.
