On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 11:10 PM Jan Mercl <0xj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > - We can create a hypothesis, that if only people coding in Go for > more than N years, the results may get very different or even > inverted. Due to the above we cannot decide the validity of the > hypothesis. The validity could be, or could have been somehow > estimated by asking a smaller corpus of well known Go developers. Not > meant as a decisive body. Just to get some more reliable data. The > Github votes are, technically speaking, not distinguishable from > noise, ad hoc brigading, etc.
I just want to note that we did in fact reach out to a number of experienced Go developers with early versions of the design draft to get their feedback before we published it (https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/design/go2draft-type-parameters.md#acknowledgements) (we reached out to other people not mentioned who did not have time to participate). > - Regardless of the endless promotion of inclusiveness, the voting > using the service of a single and notoriously controversial provider > of said service ignores, or excludes if you will, people not using > that service for any reason, not only the one I just mentioned. > > In the light of the above, it's a bit surprising that the voting > results are even seriously mentioned in this discussion. Fair enough. I cite numbers like these, and the comments on the Go survey, because they are the only numbers I have. But you're clearly right that they are problematic. 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/CAOyqgcVMuaV1_tOwSoOxY%3Dn%3DoJxcLO2jTDoxitK9pN51pKEOCw%40mail.gmail.com.
