I do think that T L has a point. The spec defines the syntax of the language, and TypeSpec refers to a syntactical construct. It is not possible in the syntax of the language to create two named types that originate in the same TypeSpec. We seem to be saying that uint8 and byte originate in the same "TypeSpec", but the "TypeSpec" referred to there is an implementation detail of the compiler, not the syntactical construct defined in the Language Specification.
I suggest the sentence be changed but not eliminated, because it is good to point out that two named types cannot be identical if either or both were created in Go code. Perhaps something like "Two named types are never identical, except for the type aliases byte and rune, which are identical to uint8 and uint32 respectively." On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 8:16 PM T L <tapir....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 2:37:23 AM UTC+8, Jan Mercl wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 7:56 PM T L <tapi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Then could you provide an example two identical custom named types > originate in the same TypeSpec? > > Answer is in the first response to the OP. > > > I feel we are in two parallel spaces. :) > > > > > -- > > -j > > -- > 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.
