[go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On 18-03-2021, Tyler Compton wrote: > I think we all want to stick our noses in this thread. I'm going to stick > my nose in it too :) > > Space, I don't think you'll ever be happy as a result of this discussion, > no matter what evidence or arguments others provide you. I think the fact > is that

Re: [go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:06 PM wilk wrote: > It is still possible to write a formal proposal "canceling generics" if > someone find now a good reason, right ? (at the time of modules i > believe it was). > I believe it is. We can always change things in response to new information - we could,

[go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On 17-03-2021, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 4:28 AM Space A. wrote: >> >> Can you provide any proof that there was an open public discussion? > > What kind of proof would you find to be acceptable? Can you give an > example of something that I could say that you would conside

Re: [go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 7:34 AM Space A. wrote: > > Go will loose its uniqueness and values, will never become a next big thing. > No cross platform GUI, no Android, and browsers (GopherJS is more dead than > alive, WASM idk) is also a big question. It will be a "bad copy" of Java or > other ma

Re: [go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

You have a unique thought, you would consider V language if that is what you have been thinking about. On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 10:35:01 PM UTC+8 Space A. wrote: > Go will loose its uniqueness and values, will never become a next big > thing. No cross platform GUI, no Android, and browsers

Re: [go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

Go will loose its uniqueness and values, will never become a next big thing. No cross platform GUI, no Android, and browsers (GopherJS is more dead than alive, WASM idk) is also a big question. It will be a "bad copy" of Java or other mature languages (with better and more powerful generics and lot

[go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On 16-03-2021, Space A. wrote: >> This seems very dismissive of the many members of the community which > *did* invest the time and energy to discuss the design for the past years. > When the contracts design was announced in 2018 >, the process was explained. Inc

[go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On 15-03-2021, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 3:11 PM atd...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> I am in favor of the proposal but I think that accounting for popularity >> votes is not a good measure of things. >> A lot of people are at various stages of their technical journey in compu

[go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

On 16-03-2021, Robert Engels wrote: > Very well said.=20 +1 -- wilk -- 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.

[go-nuts] Re: No generic, part -2

This thread seems like it has devolved into a rehashing of the recent Generics, please go away! thread . This seems unfair to the original poster, who asked a simple , respectful, question in good faith, and seems to be satis