I, like many others, am not fond of all the parenthesis, particularly at call sites. I think at definition sites, it's not so bad. It seems like the only objection to < and > are the complexity it adds for parsing. It also seems like the only place it adds ambiguity is at call or enstantiation sites. So what if we used .<? E.G. instead of Print(string)(stringSlice) we would do Print.<string>(stringSlice) I think definitions could just swap () for < > for generic type parameters, without the dot. Aside from that, and wishing that the proposal specified that generics would all be resolved at compile time rather than at run time, I'm really loving this!
Thanks for all the hard work! Aaron -- This message was sent from a mobile device -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/0477C783-B409-4D72-8731-F6691CC856D1%40fireantproductions.com.
