https://go2goplay.golang.org/p/Ol5mbIbiZhX works good enough, finally a way to make go usable for my cases(work with collections)!
There are two main things that we hope to learn 1) First, does generic code make sense? Does it feel like Go? What surprises do people encounter? Are the error messages useful? This generic code makes sense more than code duplication; define feels like Go, if it means is it comfortable to read and write - yes it is; _; _; 2) Second, we know that many people have said that Go needs generics, but we don’t necessarily know exactly what that means. Does this draft design address the problem in a useful way? If there is a problem that makes you think “I could solve this if Go had generics,” can you solve the problem when using this tool? This draft design definitely helps to address the problem in a useful way. A tool is a first step to write libraries, which can benefit from generics, in go, like flutter, fuchsia, generic caches, collections, data structures, rxGo, etc. Suggestions for further improvements, from more beneficial to less 1) Add generic libraries to work with collections (like LINQ) and streams(rxGo), generic data structures to standard library 2) Improve type inference 3) Add client-side go libraries, like Angular-go, or Flutter-go -- 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/cd2b67da-96dc-4182-9c70-88e15ff32545o%40googlegroups.com.
