4 ms·
This is pointless discussion as Go has all of these things already implemented, so there is no point in going backwards.
by gethly 10mo ago
This is pointless discussion as Go has all of these things already implemented, so there is no point in going backwards.
- exceptione 10mo agoThe point is that a (new) syntax for any language needs to support any such implementation. The language implementation itself is not the point.
- gethly 10mo agoYes, and I am saying Go has already solved all of this and it makes little sense to deviate too much from its syntax.