On Thursday, 18 June 2020 10:15:16 UTC+2, Nathanael Curin wrote: > > An argument for this is also that (all ?) languages that use generics use > <>. It might make learning just easier for new Go developers that have > experience from generics-compatible languages. >
And an argument against using <> is that lots of languages with parametric polymorphism do not use <>. It makes learning just easier for new Go developers that have experience with such languages. I dislike the use of () but a) this discussion can be made once the overall mechanism of generics / pp is settled and b) it really doesn't matter that much and c) it probably won't be plain <> anyway if its not () so endless repetitions of "<> please" is just a waste of time. V. -- 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/18ef1573-8b32-4fca-bd2d-62ae9b2e634bo%40googlegroups.com.
