I use 1 a lot and 4 (or the suggested bool<-->int conv) never. I have no idea what you want to express with 2 and 4 addresses a kind of problem that has no simple solution like a one-line function.
V. On Friday, 20 October 2023 at 15:12:06 UTC+2 Victor Giordano wrote: > Hello fellow gopherships... ¿How you doing? > > Hope just fine! > > A week ago I proposed to allow conversion from bool to int, assuming false > to 0 and true to be 1. This was the proposal > <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/63544> and I do appreciate a lot the > polite responses from Ian. > > I pick my pike and dig into... the discussion... trying to understand what > was the force or the motivation that refuses the proposal. > > I Found two interesting comments: > > - Adg stament > <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/9367#issuecomment-143128337> > - Commander statement > <https://groups.google.com/g/golang-nuts/c/wyuBhAb1Rzk/m/i3mzAg5zoikJ> > > And what i perceive is that the cons is: *It may harm readability.* > > Well... If that is the case... (because, that is what I understood, and > forget me if I'm wrong!) I have some points to put into the table if you > allow... please, do not take it hard... I'm trying to make *an statement* > . > > 1) One line Swapping > > a, b := 1, 2 // I never use this.. I always forget if the 1 go to the a > and the 2 go to b or vice-versa.. (Like now!) > > I do like to write three lines instead of one... > > 2) Block scope, not per iteration scope > <https://go.dev/blog/loopvar-preview> > > Well... actual web apps require to write in JavaScript, JavaScript uses > block scopes.. so I appreciate a LOT this feature of the language, but as > long this language has to live with other languages (like JavaScript) I > don't feel that this will release me from the burden of knowing how to deal > with block scopes variables used in a closure. JavaScript is not an example > of well designed language but is the language widely used in web apps. > > 3) Generics... > > Well... With interfaces I already got the genericity I need to model > abstractions.. But I do appreciate generics, because they do allow us to > write less code at the cost complicating the language grammar. I start to > use them... but before that I have no problem on converting an slice of > interfaces using a for loop. > > 4) I "grow" writing these lines on any C program *I'm not too old (to > reason), but also not too young (to dream). I have 40* > > #define TRUE 1 > #define FALSE 0 > > *That definitively has shaped my mind.* > > *So the statement is*: > > The points 1,2 and 3 I show... are examples of questionable (at least, for > me) things that you directly inject into the language. The point 4 I show > how I feel that a bool is, in turn, an int. > > The proposal of making bool to int, could co exists. And people can choose > to use it or not. You may give it a try... for me (and other folks) well > come in handy in situations like this > <https://github.com/vituchon/escobita/blob/dcff51ccf8b44f17d82b724650a24f967f282b9f/model/bot_player.go#L111> > (context: > count the number of Spanish's cards that belongs to the GOLD suit). > > If you say me: "Ey victor, we just won't put it because we don't like it" > <- I will buy it. > > Or > > You may convince me... I leave that to you. I will try to stay open (I do > recognize myself as person that can be a little stubborn.) > > Final words > > Is not my language and you have done a wonderful job... I mean.. from the > old days in C, passing thought the cosmos of C++, then OOP disembark with > Java and C#... and then Golang mixing a lot of learned lessons into a > single language! > > Actual final words: > > Informal Greetings! 🤠🧉 > > > > -- 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/61e90e0d-30a1-4c75-b6d3-9933dcaad632n%40googlegroups.com.
