4 ms·

I think you are missing the point. Of course you can't assume what a function will do with certainty.

• pjmlp 10y ago
  From CS point of view + is just a function name just like any other. A concept used in lambda calculus, introduced in computing since Lisp exists. Also part of abstract mathematics field, where operator symbols get defined for the proofs.
  • sagichmal 10y ago
    > From CS point of view + is just a function name just like any other. From a Go point of view, it isn't.
    • pjmlp 10y ago
      Just because Go eschews decades of CS knowledge, in the name of the "easy to hire programmers" for Google[1], it doesn't make it less true. [1] - According to the language designers own words
      • sagichmal 10y ago
        What you wrote isn't a universal truth. In Go, + is not a function like any other. There's no argument to this.
        • deleted 10y ago
          [deleted]
        • dahauns 10y ago
          What is the difference, apart from the notation?
    • sheepmullet 10y ago
      The point is in most languages operator overloading is no more complex than a method call. It's not exactly magic.
      • nuggien 10y ago
        Overloading + could be magic if you want it to be. In go, + is exactly what you think it is. In languages with operator overloading, I literally could make + do whatever I wanted to.
        • pjmlp 10y ago
          Just like you can make a function do something totally unrelated to how it is called, do what it is actually in the name, wipe out the hard drive, launch missiles, whatever.