> For example, the multiple proposals that flowed out of https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-error-handling-overview.md . None of them have been adopted.
I remember what was happening to "try" error handling proposal. It was withdrawn only because of active resistance by the community. And what's happened to a new "generics" proposal, it also got a lot of critics but was "accepted" in less than a month after formal publication on github. As Russ said "No change in consensus". What does it mean? Who are these people who can change the consensus? How was it measured? A few days after Russ locked it, so nobody can even say a word against it if they wanted. So it looks very much that company management learned from "try" proposal. пн, 15 мар. 2021 г. в 05:27, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org>: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 7:59 AM Space A. <reexist...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > You are a smart guy, one of the smartest I have ever talked to. But it > looks like you somehow missed a very obvious thing. The people you > mentioned (and most of the so-called Go team) AFAIK are Google employees. > They work for a company and they are paid for the work they do. If, as you > say, they spend so much time, literally years, keep replying "if we find an > approach that gives value blablabla", how do you imagine anyone responsible > for the process at the end say smth like: "Alright guys, after spending so > many man-years we have few solutions, but we finally realized that we were > moving in wrong direction, so now we gonna be dropping everything for the > sake of better future of Go". Like c'mon? Read what's written, not just > words and punctuation, it was a one way ticket (and managers knew it), if > you start this process, start spending money and reporting man hours, you > know that it will land somewhere. > > I understand that argument, but I don't believe that it accurately > describes the development of the language. The clearest way to see > that is by looking at counter-examples. There have been several > efforts to change the Go language in the past that have, to date, > failed to occur, despite people "spending money and reporting man > hours." For example, the multiple proposals that flowed out of > > https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/master/design/go2draft-error-handling-overview.md > . > None of them have been adopted. > > The people who work on Go, including the managers, are aware of the > risks of "we've started this project so we must complete it." > Language development doesn't work that way. It's OK to realize that > some ideas just can't be made to work. > > This is helped by the fact that most language changes don't require > much work to start out. For many years I was the only person working > on generics in Go, and I certainly wasn't doing it full time. Then > for several years it was Robert Griesemer and I, again not full time. > Today there are several people working on generics in Go, but that is > only because we got it to the point of a proposal that could be > accepted. > > > > And I repeat, there wasn't a (public) question or discussion or anything > regarding should we drop this topic entirely. > > There have been many public discussions on this mailing list as to > whether generics should be dropped entirely. > > Ian > -- 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/CADKwOTcsNzf-jT2gC331kmd0E99dKZm77t3djjqDoHsFrnwVLQ%40mail.gmail.com.
