On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 4:10 AM Andrew Harris <harris...@spu.edu> wrote:
>
> 1. Tuple types
> Outside of generics, tuple type syntax requires named fields.
>
> TupleType = "(" { IdentifierList Type [ ", " ] } ")" .
>
> // e.g.:
> type Point (X, Y int)
>
> More irregularly, the TupleType syntax is used exclusively to declare named
> types, and these named tuple types cannot implement methods. As a result, a
> named tuple type is entirely defined at the site of the type definition.
Thanks for writing this up.
This part of what you wrote seems too similar to a struct. I don't
know whether we will ever add tuples to Go, but I'm certain that if we
add them they must be clearly distinct from structs. If people ever
start wondering "should I use a struct or should I use a tuple," then
we have failed. One of the goals of Go is that it should be a simple
language. One of the characteristics of a simple language is that
people spend their time writing code. They don't spend their time
considering which aspects of a language to use and how.
Go is also intended to be an orthogonal language. That means that a
concept should apply wherever it is meaningful. In particular, in Go,
any named type should be permitted to have methods. To add a
restriction saying that certain kinds of types can't have methods is
to complicate the language and means that people have more to
remember.
Thanks.
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/CAOyqgcWuiBPhj%3D8wsXWXRKz6%2BdW%3D1jdLQObkc93GOiY5Hwg_3Q%40mail.gmail.com.
