I was specifically talking about Ian's example, where no methods are
defined.
On Tuesday, 6 April 2021 at 15:57:18 UTC+2 Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 9:04 PM yiyus <yiyu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > then I guess you mean that interface { MyInt } will accept any type
>> > argument whose underlying type is the same as the underlying type of
>> > MyInt. But that seems strange. There is no connection between MyInt
>> > and MyInt2, except that they happen to be defined in terms of the same
>> > underlying type.
>>
>> This is an excellent example. Indeed, I think that MyInt and MyInt2
>> should satisfy the same constraints (because they support exactly the same
>> operations). Just like MyString and MyString2 will implement the Stringer
>> interface if they happen to have a String method, and there is no way to
>> constrain the types which can implement Stringer, I think that any type
>> that can be used in a generic function like an int should satisfy
>> interface{int} (and therefore also interface{MyInt} and interface{MyInt2}).
>>
>
> But they don't necessarily support exactly the same operations if they
> have different methods. So maybe you mean that MyInt and MyInt2 should
> satisfy the same constraints if they have the same underlying type and
> happen to support the same method sets.
>
--
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/520da01c-b19f-443d-ae88-98221ceb2dccn%40googlegroups.com.
