4 ms·

You forgot to list the most useful feature of adding generics: people on the internet can no longer say "lol no generics", drastically reducing the amount of ga

by zeeboo 4y ago

You forgot to list the most useful feature of adding generics: people on the internet can no longer say "lol no generics", drastically reducing the amount of garbage comments about Go.

valyala 4y ago
Except that these people now pollute the Internet with freaky packages, which use generics in esoteric ways :)
- 0x62c1b43e 4y ago
  But if adoption is “very low”, then it’s not much pollution, is it?
thunky 4y ago
Those comments have now been replaced with "adding generics to Go was a big mistake".
- philosopher1234 4y ago
  Maybe they will, but they haven't, since this is the first time I've seen that comment. The "lol no generics" was endemic.
  - 0x62c1b43e 4y ago
    It’s hard to be objective because of filter bubbles, but I’ve seen it a lot on Reddit last.
    - 0x62c1b43e 4y ago
      *lately It pops up on /r/golang sometimes. I don’t think it gets taken super seriously but there’s usually at least someone bringing it up.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
SPBS 4y ago
They'll never go away, it just morphed into "Go was wrong and finally learnt the lesson that Java 5 did 19 years ago by adding in generics". Go showed that useful software could be written without user-level generics. I don't think any other language today would dare to do that. In fact most languages seem to be converging into the same thing.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  We already knew how to write useful software without user-level generics, we have been doing it for decades since FORTRAN came to be in 1957, no need for Go to prove anything beyond the stubbornness of its designers.
- Macha 4y ago
  Useful software can also be written in asm and we have the entire early software industry to demonstrate that. That's not the same as it being a good idea
  - valyala 4y ago
    Go is about productivity. It allows writing, extending and maintaining big codebases with lower efforts comparing to assembly or some other programming language out there. This is because of simple "what you read is what you get" syntax without implicit code execution. Generics break this feature :( Of course, there are other brilliant features in Go ecosystem, which simplify writing and maintaining non-trivial codebases in Go - tooling, standard library, fast compile times, statically linked binaries, etc.

by zeeboo 4y ago

You forgot to list the most useful feature of adding generics: people on the internet can no longer say "lol no generics", drastically reducing the amount of garbage comments about Go.

valyala 4y ago

Except that these people now pollute the Internet with freaky packages, which use generics in esoteric ways :)

0x62c1b43e 4y ago
But if adoption is “very low”, then it’s not much pollution, is it?

thunky 4y ago

Those comments have now been replaced with "adding generics to Go was a big mistake".

philosopher1234 4y ago
Maybe they will, but they haven't, since this is the first time I've seen that comment. The "lol no generics" was endemic.
- 0x62c1b43e 4y ago
  It’s hard to be objective because of filter bubbles, but I’ve seen it a lot on Reddit last.
  - 0x62c1b43e 4y ago
    *lately It pops up on /r/golang sometimes. I don’t think it gets taken super seriously but there’s usually at least someone bringing it up.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

SPBS 4y ago

They'll never go away, it just morphed into "Go was wrong and finally learnt the lesson that Java 5 did 19 years ago by adding in generics". Go showed that useful software could be written without user-level generics. I don't think any other language today would dare to do that. In fact most languages seem to be converging into the same thing.

pjmlp 4y ago
We already knew how to write useful software without user-level generics, we have been doing it for decades since FORTRAN came to be in 1957, no need for Go to prove anything beyond the stubbornness of its designers.
Macha 4y ago
Useful software can also be written in asm and we have the entire early software industry to demonstrate that. That's not the same as it being a good idea
- valyala 4y ago
  Go is about productivity. It allows writing, extending and maintaining big codebases with lower efforts comparing to assembly or some other programming language out there. This is because of simple "what you read is what you get" syntax without implicit code execution. Generics break this feature :( Of course, there are other brilliant features in Go ecosystem, which simplify writing and maintaining non-trivial codebases in Go - tooling, standard library, fast compile times, statically linked binaries, etc.