4 ms·

I personally think this will be a great thing for the quality of the language (no typed higher-order functions is a massive pain point as-is), but at the same t

by buu700 5y ago

I personally think this will be a great thing for the quality of the language (no typed higher-order functions is a massive pain point as-is), but at the same time one could argue that this is an equally massive bait-and-switch for all the developers who prefer Go's original take on "simplicity".

pm90 5y ago
Go is still pretty “simple”. They didn’t introduce a while loop. Adding generics would arguably “simplify” the language even further since you would presumably throw away a lot of duplicated code.
- mseepgood 5y ago
  They can simplify code, but they don't simplify the language.
  - masklinn 5y ago
    The langage which already had generics except special-cased to builtins the langage authors really wanted to be generic and they know better than the peons so they have the intellectual capacity to make this determination?
    - mseepgood 5y ago
      you sound bitter
      - masklinn 5y ago
        I'm just believing what Rob Pike told me about his target users for Go.
- Zababa 5y ago
  > Go is still pretty “simple”. They didn’t introduce a while loop. What are you talking about? There is already a while loop, it's just under a different name. I don't think reusing keywords for other purposes is an example of simplicity.