Firstly, my compliments to Russ, Robbert, and Ian, for patience, thoughtfulness, and insight. Whatever the best answer is, no doubt your intellectual process is an excellent way to find it.
My comment is a meta-comment, a question/proposal: *if generics arrive in Go 2 then can we "go fix" Go 1 code to use this mechanism to replace the existing built-in magic generics in Go?* For example, if it is possible to implement *map* in ordinary library code, then should it be the rule to do so? The heop is that accepting this as the test for goodness simultaneously proves capability and reduces the instances of magical compiler support in favor of a new orthogonal feature, perhaps making Go 2 conceptually smaller, which seems a good goal. -- *Michael T. jonesmichael.jo...@gmail.com <michael.jo...@gmail.com>* -- 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.
