IssueRaiser

Isn't that sort of like saying it's not worth using data structures other than maps and slices?

Isn't that sort of like saying it's not worth using data structures other than maps and slices? In go, if you want a complex data structure you either use interfaces -- as the authors of this library did -- or you rely on some sort of code generation approach. I've followed the go team's discussion of generics for a long time now. They've always claimed they're open to proposals that fit the philosophy of the language, but they're seemingly not in any hurry to address the issue. And that's fine. But I won't pretend it isn't frustrating every time I want to build something with a non-trivial data structure. Sometimes a map or a slice just doesn't cut it.

Posted by timmytokyo on Jul 4, 2015, 5:35 AM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.5,500 issues0 comments

hackernews (Other)

Isn't that sort of like saying it's not worth using data structures other than maps and slices?

timmytokyoJul 4, 2015, 5:35 AM

Isn't that sort of like saying it's not worth using data structures other than maps and slices? In go, if you want a complex data structure you either use interfaces -- as the authors of this library did -- or you rely on some sort of code generation approach. I've followed the go team's discussion of generics for a long time now. They've always claimed they're open to proposals that fit the philosophy of the language, but they're seemingly not in any hurry to address the issue. And that's fine. But I won't pretend it isn't frustrating every time I want to build something with a non-trivial data structure. Sometimes a map or a slice just doesn't cut it.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue