3 ms·
>I think is also the response of Go to their lack-of-generics, which I think is kind of crap. The response I've overwhelmingly observed from qualified voices i
by omginternets 11y ago
>I think is also the response of Go to their lack-of-generics, which I think is kind of crap.
The response I've overwhelmingly observed from qualified voices isn't "boo generics!" but "generics are terribly difficult to get right, and we want to know more about Go's niche before making any design decisions in that realm".
I suspect you're reading a lot of drivel from web programmers who discovered net/http last Thursday. It's hard not to be frustrated with the internet, I concede...
- TillE 11y agoA huge variety of other languages have successfully implemented generics. The Go team seems to be looking for some mythical ideal solution with no tradeoffs, and will therefore never do it.
- omginternets 11y ago>A huge variety of other languages have successfully implemented generics Completely irrelevant; the argument isn't "generics are hard [full stop]". The argument is "generics are hard" AND "we don't know Go's niche well enough to commit to any specific approach".
- mike_hearn 11y agoBut how can they not know that, after so many years?
- omginternets 11y agoYou'd have to ask them, but I suppose it takes years to carve out a niche. What I can say is that I recently interviewed a Google engineer who was conducting a survey of Go's usage, so it seems they're at least studying the question.