Can I ask the question out of turn?
Ok. I ask.
What wrong in Java way?
What wrong in C# way?
Of course, they have a boxing/unboxing concepts.
Does this means that boxing/unboxing is very, very, very slow operations
and should not be used even in Java or in C#?
But they used. They used at least in generics programming in the languages.
Does this means that generics programming in these languages are very,
very, very slow?
Does this means that generics programming in other languages are very,
very, very fast?
Generics programming are always compromise between the performance and
universality.
Where universality always means an usability.
C++ way is out of the scope.
@Ian Lance Taylor
Add an additional reserved field into the potential generic types and this
will allows to starts some experiments with implementing transpilers from
the "Go.next" to the "Go".
Eg.
type structType struct {
rtype
fields []structField
reserv unsafe.Pointer // place for the extra info about
generic/parametrized type
}
type interfaceType struct {
rtype
methods []imethod // sorted by hash
reserv unsafe.Pointer // place for the extra info about
generic/parametrized type
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
