uriel_follower wrote: > Pillsy Wrote: [...] > > At this point I'm mystified as to why language designers just keep > > on making this same mistake by leaving support for generic > > programming out of their statically typed languages. Java and C# > > had to graft generics onto their languages after the fact; why > > ignore that?
> Can you please explain when have you missed them? I haven't even bothered trying Go because lacking support for generics is so obviously the Wrong Thing[tm]. [...] > Specially now the new append() builtin has taken care of most of > the remaining cases where generics might have been marginally > useful. Wait, why did they need to introduce a *whole new builtin*? Why should this have to be builtin *at all*? [...] > Because nobody ever reused any code in languages without > generics! Re-using code in statically typed languages is harder if they don't have generics. And after seeing people say, "Oh, yeah, you really don't need generics in our language!" a few times only to sheepishly bolt them on a few years later doesn't inspire much confidence this time around. Cheers, Pillsy
