6 ms·
"The intent is not to add generics to Go at this time, but rather to show people what a complete proposal would look like. We hope this will be of help to anyon
by f2f 10y ago
"The intent is not to add generics to Go at this time, but rather to show people what a complete proposal would look like. We hope this will be of help to anyone proposing similar language changes in the future."
This started in 2010. Hopefully an illustration that go's developers are not against generics in general, this ought to quell some of the negativity... Pick one of the four proposals you like :)
- andrewstuart2 10y agoThe proposal document itself may have existed for that long, but it's only been public for 14 days. To me, the important portion is the link to the discussion issue [1] created 2 hours ago, which to me seems like a more significant step towards doing the actual work. Before, the default response was "we're thinking about it." Now, it's "let's all talk about it." [1] https://github.com/golang/go/issues/15292 https://github.com/golang/go/issues/15292
- f2f 10y agobut the existence of the proposals assumes there were internal discussions, which is counter to the argument that go devs don't care about generics. had anything good come out of that it would've been published in the open. as it stands, the negatives outweigh the positives. hopefully the new discussion will change that, or an entirely new proposal will make everyone see the light.
- kyrra 10y agoThis was actually mentioned during the Golang team's AMA on reddit. They have wanted to make the proposals for generics public for a while, it probably just took some effort to organize it all and make sure it was OK to publish. https://www.reddit.com/r/golang/comments/46bd5h/ama_we_are_the_go_contributors_ask_us_anything/d03tsxw https://www.reddit.com/r/golang/comments/46bd5h/ama_we_are_t... > Some people on the Go team have sunk considerable time in producing generics proposals, but they've all had serious drawbacks. I'm hoping those proposals will be published at some point so people can see the depth of complexity that generics bring; it's almost always underestimated.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dsymonds 10y agoIt's not so much "let's all talk about it", but "here's how detailed a proposal needs to be to make it worth considering".
- andrewstuart2 10y agoSorry, I mean the opening of a Github issue regarding generic programming by the Go team itself is the beginning of a new stance.
- dsymonds 10y agoIt isn't a new stance either. For years people have been posting their ideas for Go generics to golang-nuts, and the questions inevitably lead to asking how they'd implement it, how it would interact with interfaces, and so on. Most of the time the proposer hadn't thought it all the way through in those regards. The point of publishing these proposals is to help speed up that process: now the first response can be to point at these and ask for a similar level of thoroughness.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Scarbutt 10y agoThey better implement something very near by, Swift is coming for them.
- drivebyops 10y agoYea Swift is honestly great to write
- eyko 10y agoDoesn't Swift's tooling leave much to be desired?
- zimpenfish 10y agoI haven't really looked at Swift properly but from what I see on the iOS dev blogs I follow, it's a lot more complex than Go and I can't see how productivity / etc. would be improved sufficiently to make the learning and general brain investment worthwhile for me.
- coldtea 10y ago>This started in 2010. Hopefully an illustration that go's developers are not against generics in general, this ought to quell some of the negativity... Wouldn't the fact that this started 6 years ago and gone nowhere re-enforce the negativity?