May 29, 2010
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:

> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/c93iy/go_at_io_frequently_asked_questions/
> 
> "Do you have plans to implement generics?
> Many proposals for generics-like features have been mooted both publicly
> and internally, but as yet we haven't found a proposal that is
> consistent with the rest of the language. We think that one of Go's key
> strengths is its simplicity, so we are wary of introducing new features
> that might make the language more difficult to understand. Additionally,
> the more Go code we write (and thus the better we learn how to write Go
> code ourselves), the less we feel the need for such a language feature."

So they've simplified the language at the cost of more complex user code.  They should have just said that they haven't found a proposal they like yet and left it at that.
May 29, 2010
On 05/29/2010 10:43 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
>
>> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/c93iy/go_at_io_frequently_asked_questions/
>>
>>
>>
"Do you have plans to implement generics?
>> Many proposals for generics-like features have been mooted both
>> publicly and internally, but as yet we haven't found a proposal
>> that is consistent with the rest of the language. We think that one
>> of Go's key strengths is its simplicity, so we are wary of
>> introducing new features that might make the language more
>> difficult to understand. Additionally, the more Go code we write
>> (and thus the better we learn how to write Go code ourselves), the
>> less we feel the need for such a language feature."
>
> So they've simplified the language at the cost of more complex user
> code.  They should have just said that they haven't found a proposal
> they like yet and left it at that.

Exactly. This "the more code we write the less we felt a need for genericity" reflects very poorly - just not on genericity.

Andrei
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home