2 ms·
I mean, here's the Go 1.18 release notes and what they have to say about the dev team's level of faith in the stability of their implementation: https://go.dev/
by Macha 4y ago
I mean, here's the Go 1.18 release notes and what they have to say about the dev team's level of faith in the stability of their implementation: https://go.dev/doc/go1.18 https://go.dev/doc/go1.18
Is it a surprise that the low uptake is there with a discouragement like that?
- valyala 4y agoI'm sorry, but I don't get this comment. Go is a great programming language! It is great because it is easy to write, read and maintain programs written in Go. This is because of the following features: - Simple syntax - Fast compile times - Great tooling (go fmt, go vet, go too pprof, go tool cover, race detector, ect.) - Useful standard library Generics do not improve any of these features :( They complicate syntax, they slow down compile times and they complicate internals of go compiler and tools.
- valyala 4y agoBTW, it is great to see that Go1.20 and the upcoming Go1.21 [1] return to good things instead of generics: - Performance optimizations (profile-guided optimization, GC optimizations, etc.) - Reducing compile times - Reducing binary sizes (improved linker, which can throw away unused code more aggressively) [1] https://groups.google.com/g/golang-dev/c/V8ez4YunkeE https://groups.google.com/g/golang-dev/c/V8ez4YunkeE
- philosopher1234 4y agoI doubt that was very widely read. I think it would be a mistake to attribute much of the adoption to that statement.