3 ms·

thanks foe the reply and i understand your sentiment. i think what will happen is that people will start advocating for more and more syntax changes. think of =

thanks foe the reply and i understand your sentiment. i think what will happen is that people will start advocating for more and more syntax changes. think of => in js instead of function. a minor tweak but with HUGE impact. probably much more than const/let etc. and eventually more and more of this will change the language. but i hope i am wrong. :-) in general i get your point amd agree with it. i have written large go codebases and ran into exactly the same issues. but i wouldn't agree to the trade off :-) then i would have used Rust in the first place I guess

jerf 5y ago
"i think what will happen is that people will start advocating for more and more syntax changes. think of => in js instead of function." They won't need to start; hit the Go issue tracker to see a whole bunch of them have already been made and rejected. People have been advocating for them for a while. I virtually guarantee that of all languages, the Go team will not change their mind in response to existence of generics for them. Their bar for accepting changes is very, very high. It is not insurmountable, but it is very high. Remember, Go didn't come out yesterday. Go is now over ten years old. We have a good idea of the velocity of changes it makes. It is low.