bearophile Wrote: > Andrei: > > > So Sean was right - it _did_ take him five minutes to find a fatal flaw. > > You are right. But in this case the language may just disallow empty bodies > for if(), for(), etc.
Making the current broken behavior an error would be trivial and wouldn't break any existing Go programs. That's why it seems so weird to me that this behavior was documented instead of simply fixed, and why I imagine it will be fixed at some point regardless.
