This thread helped me to understand better the current scenario and the 
implications of a future change.

I would be glad to recognize if this conversation had changed my mind, but 
it didn't.

Some programmers discovered that they could use this "valid nil interface" 
to do some smart tricks, as Jakob kindly has shown. While I do recognize 
that was indeed smart, Jakob offered another easy way of attaining the 
desired effect for his constructor. It would be pretty easy if he had to 
code that way to begin with.

I consider unfortunate the fact that I can't safely use an interface where 
previously I used a pointer. To me, at least, that is a natural 
evolutionary path for a piece of software as soon as the developer discover 
opportunities to leverage the commonality of an interface. I think such 
possibility would be more broadly useful than what we can do now.

Go has a bunch of interesting tricks and useful idioms, but this trick is 
proving costly.

Thanks to everyone.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to