Fair enough … I understand that people have different styles On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:54:20 AM UTC-6 Brian Candler wrote:
> FWIW, I'm in the "I like how it is now better than any other proposal so > far" camp; I think this happens as you get used to the Go way. Go is Go. > > The only thing I would consider is making *interface* types (only) > implicitly usable in a boolean context, e.g. > > if err { ... } > > However, I suppose people would ask "why not pointers? why not channels?" > etc. I'm not suggesting it should become like Python where every non-zero > value is treated as "true". Interface values are special, and there's very > little you can do with a nil interface (whereas for example, a nil pointer > can still have methods called on it). But this does add a special case, > and Go already has its share of surprises you have to learn. > > On Tuesday, 1 August 2023 at 22:41:38 UTC+1 DrGo wrote: > >> Yes. Go is no longer the simple language it was. I suspect because of >> internal pressures within Google as evidenced by multiple innovations that >> seem to come from nowhere eg dir embedding and associated fs package that >> duplicated perfectly good ways of doing things. The module system while >> useful is quite complex. Generics and all the associated packages inflated >> the mental burden of learning and reading Go code significantly. And having >> the go 1 compatibility guarantee means that old stuff remains valid code >> and must be learned too. >> >> On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 2:59:07 PM UTC-6 Victor Giordano wrote: >> >>> Yeah.. I mean, the "idiom" `err != nil return` err is something of the >>> language. I complain about the boilerplate that idiom produces and that is >>> fact fact (no one can deny it). >>> >>> You know, your approach implies making the language a little more >>> complicated as new ways to deal with errors appear. I do understand that >>> some folks provide some push back on the idea simply because there is >>> nothing wrong with the language right now regarding error handling. >>> >>> As I see things, the language was simple in their origins, but from time >>> to time they complicated a little more some things, for example "what about >>> generics?" (are they really necessary?, I mean... I think using interfaces >>> provides all the genericity you may need). So I guess there is room to make >>> some changes and make the language easier. I would say that both ways of >>> handling errors are valid, the most important is to be as simple >>> as possible so you ensure that other people understand it. Like Generics, >>> you don't have to use them. So I would praise it for adding another way, >>> less repetitive. >>> >>> Also like to see how people react and what their opinions are. So far >>> what I read is just personal taste. >>> >>> >>> El mar, 1 ago 2023 a las 16:04, 'Luke Crook' via golang-nuts (< >>> golan...@googlegroups.com>) escribió: >>> >>>> And of course I forgot the "if" at the beginning of all those >>>> conditional. *sigh* >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>> Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/golang-nuts/dRLR4hxxI8A/unsubscribe. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADtPBF2%3DTNBorhCCamWGb29qkNkXxgFZ%2BmnhkOC0kG2sxzp%3DWw%40mail.gmail.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CADtPBF2%3DTNBorhCCamWGb29qkNkXxgFZ%2BmnhkOC0kG2sxzp%3DWw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> V >>> >> -- 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/7f7c62e4-805f-46ef-8b77-64e5fe3b3cdfn%40googlegroups.com.