IssueRaiser

But it looks like Go has done similar things in the past.

But it looks like Go has done similar things in the past. For example, the slicing operation gained an additional optional argument ( https://golang.org/doc/go1.2#three_index ). It's not exactly the same thing, but it seems roughly in the same league of difficulty. Based on what I'm reading, versioning is a serious pain point. Sure, you always have to make sure the payoff is worth the additional complexity (universally, not just in Go) but the author seems to categorically disqualify this option by incorrectly saying that it would break backwards compatibility.

Posted by cakoose on Apr 29, 2015, 9:23 AM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.7,000 issues0 comments

hackernews (Other)

But it looks like Go has done similar things in the past.

cakooseApr 29, 2015, 9:23 AM

But it looks like Go has done similar things in the past. For example, the slicing operation gained an additional optional argument ( https://golang.org/doc/go1.2#three_index ). It's not exactly the same thing, but it seems roughly in the same league of difficulty. Based on what I'm reading, versioning is a serious pain point. Sure, you always have to make sure the payoff is worth the additional complexity (universally, not just in Go) but the author seems to categorically disqualify this option by incorrectly saying that it would break backwards compatibility.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue