On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 at 06:18, Kurtis Rader <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's also unclear to me why you think using "any" would be less safe. You > still have to use a type-assertion or type-switch to disambiguate the two > cases. If the compiler allowed your example it might catch obvious mistakes > at compile time but you still have to hand write code to detect at run-time > which case is in effect. And such code should always have a "Oops! Got the > wrong type" path. > In common parlance, "type-safe" means exactly, that a class of runtime errors is prevented at compile time. That is the purpose of types. A function constrained on `ReadStringer` would not be safer to *write*, because, you would still need a type-switch that would need to include a runtime panic branch. But it would be safer to *use*, because the compiler would prevent a user from ever triggering that runtime panic. -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAEkBMfG09J%3DUcb-TSOJa1WRiK5N5DuwdpDMWAugutZmrnYztsw%40mail.gmail.com.
