> > Can you please explain when have you missed them? Because after writing > quite a bit of Go code, and talking with other people that has written even > more Go code, almost nobody has found this to be an issue. >
This is such a crap argument, I don't even know how to counter. Perhaps instead of trolling the D mailing list (and reddit and HN), you should put that effort into fixing your [what I and many "other people" believe to be an] inherently broken pet language. On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Pillsy <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >
