But Michael, that implementation isn't right for floats! Check out the
actual source for math.Max.
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016, 6:31 PM Michael Jones <michael.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The wonderful history of symbolic algebra at IBM (Scratchpad, Scratchpad
> II) resulted in a third system, Axiom, that has always seemed to me a
> bright lesson in types. It boldly goes into the topic with rigor, using
> category theory to decide what relationships make sense and what the nature
> of a tensor cross product of types truly is.
>
> A key part of that is the notion of *more general* and *more specific*
> types. This makes it possible to define a function that needs arguments
> supporting a less than order relationship so it could be applied to integer
> and real arguments, but not to complex numbers. This is just the mechanism
> that makes a generic Max() easy to create. Imagine a definition like:
>
> func {T type, where a,b ∈T allows a<b} Max(a, b T) T {
>
> if a < b {
> return b
> }
> return a
>
> }
>
> This is a nice way to answer the riddle and it is just what Axiom supports
> (but expresses differently).
> http://axiom-developer.org/axiom-website/bookvol2.pdf
>
> Michael Jones
> michael.jo...@gmail.com
>
> On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:10 PM, 'Thomas Bushnell, BSG' via golang-nuts <
> golang-nuts@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Really? How would you implement math.Max with generics?
>
> Thomas
>
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016, 5:45 AM Viktor Kojouharov <vkojouha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> https://golang.org/pkg/math/ and https://golang.org/pkg/container/ are
>> just two stdlib packages that would greatly benefit from some kind of
>> generics. I'm pretty sure there are more packages in the stdlib that would
>> be greatly improved. And that's just the standard library.
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:29:37 PM UTC+3, Henry wrote:
>>>
>>> You still haven't provided any argument why generics is indispensable.
>>>
>>> The reason why I am no longer sure about my position in this issue is
>>> because -while I agree that generics is useful- I don't think that generics
>>> is essential. In fact, all of C++ features are useful and implemented in a
>>> very efficient manner, but take a look what happened when you slab that
>>> many features together. If you can do away with less, I think you should go
>>> for less. The trouble is deprecating language features is a lot harder than
>>> deprecating APIs in the standard library, while programming fads come and
>>> go.
>>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "golang-nuts" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "golang-nuts" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
