It is not at all obvious that you have sufficient experience of writing Go for anyone to take your, rather disrespectful, comments seriously. Ian has been working on finding a workable model for generic programming in Go for at least 5 years. To many of us, contracts look like a pragmatic solution. A little humility goes a long way.
On Fri, 19 Oct 2018, 18:56 Eric Raymond, <e...@thyrsus.com> wrote: > > > On Friday, October 19, 2018 at 1:48:36 PM UTC-4, alanfo wrote: >> >> In the light of all the feedback there's been, I've put together a >> proposal which sticks closely to the original design and only changes what >> most people consider needs to be changed in some way. Some recent ideas >> which seemed plausible but which I felt had little chance of adoption have >> been rejected. >> > > Surface changes that don't tackle the fundamental unwieldiness and > overcomplexity of the contracts extension. > > A good honest effort, Alan, but (with due respect to the people who put in > cleverness and effort on the original overcomplication, I don't mean to > insult them) this is lipstick on a pig. > > -- > 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.
