(It's worth pointing out that Go does offer lots that pre-generics java doesn't, in particular interfaces w/ structural typing.) Ag...

(It's worth pointing out that Go does offer lots that pre-generics java doesn't, in particular interfaces w/ structural typing.) Agreed that not having generics is a real pain-point, though not as bad as I would've assumed before using the language. For the channel stuff, you could always just make use "chan interface{}", have your generic chan library, and then cast when receiving from the channel. Or you could use code generation to make specific versions of your library for various types, maybe using the upcoming go generate. It's kind of interesting, because C++ templates, for example, essentially are code-generation, but just hidden away, and for that reason tend to get overused (IMO), resulting in crazy-long compile times. If Go's solution to generics ends up being "generate the code explicitly", it would seem uniquely Go-ish -- inelegant, but might work well practice. (I do sort of dream about some kind of generics in Go -- something like where X interface{} type LinkedList X struct { Obj X Next *LinkedList X } and maybe... where X Lessable type Heap X []X func (h *Heap X) Push(x X) { ... } or even just where X interface{} func PushHeap(h []X, x X, less func (a,b X) bool) { ... } Ah, to dream :)

Posted by dilap on Oct 17, 2014, 7:00 PM

Tags

• hackernews (Other)

Related issues

• Not sure what you suggest to do.
• Why is this not yet published on the official website and why is there no CVE?
• The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained&#x2...
• The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
• (My comment is about detached houses).
• The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...