A fork is a bad choice. Better to just not use them and/or prohibit them by policy in your org. A fork will die a slow painful death - this is a personal opinion only.
> On Dec 21, 2020, at 11:50 AM, L Godioleskky <lgod...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hopefully, the Go team will encapsulate all generics in a separate > module(s), so that those of us who want to ignore them can easily do so > >> On Monday, December 21, 2020 at 7:26:02 AM UTC-5 Space A. wrote: >> Unfortunately it was expected that creators of the language will not resist >> forever being under the pressure of masses most which do not even code in >> Go, or not use Go as the main language and just following patterns and >> shitty idioms they took elsewhere. Generics are bullshit crap in its >> essence. They either don't improve anything or overused (with some huge >> cost). I'm telling this as someone who had 15+ years in Java before moved to >> Go. I was literally happy when I found that Go has almost everything which >> is good about programming and almost nothing bad. And I knew that it will >> start degrading at some point. I just keep some hopes that community will >> fork the language after this "Cyberpunk" releases. Rephrasing "no is >> temporary, yes is forever": good Go is temporary. >> >> >> >> >> воскресенье, 20 декабря 2020 г. в 22:38:54 UTC+3, Martin Hanson: >>> I think people who want generics added to Go should go and program in Java >>> or C++. >>> >>> Adding generics to Go will ruin the beautiful simplicity of the language >>> and I haven't found a single example in which adding generics to Go pays >>> off. >>> >>> Even with the examples of having two almost identical functions reverse >>> some list, one of ints and one of strings, seriously!? We already have tons >>> and tons of open source reusable code that covers all use cases which >>> people complain about. >>> >>> Go was designed without generics purposefully from the start and Go is fine >>> just the way it is. >>> >>> Adding generics means that we're opening the door to the beginning of >>> bloating Go with all the crap that Java, C++ and all the other complex >>> languages has gotten over the years, and Go was designed specifically >>> without that clutter. So we add generics, then what? Classes? >>> >>> Adding generics to Go ruins that beautiful simplicity that went into the >>> design and the added complexity just isn't worth it! The standard library >>> have managed just fine without generics and so have we! > > -- > 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/ad1b3da3-f270-47f9-8c08-ffc5ea6cb5efn%40googlegroups.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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/9D337DC2-339E-491F-9B56-7A052E9E7BA2%40ix.netcom.com.
