> @all, thanks for the explanation! in my view, all the "details" come from reasoning about Go through the sieve of other programming languages. nothing wrong in doing that, as long as the original intention is understood. for me, Go will always be looked through the sieve of C, in particular the kind of C the authors wrote for Plan 9. even though some of the decisions may have looked strange to me at one point or another, summarily Go is much more complete.
the standard library implementation on the other hand should be looked through the sieve of Go and Go alone. and perhaps the go1 compatibility guarantee :) -- 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 golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
