On Saturday, August 27, 2016 at 3:39:16 AM UTC+8, Volker Dobler wrote: > > Am Freitag, 26. August 2016 21:13:16 UTC+2 schrieb xiio...@gmail.com: >> >> *[...] *I haven't checked the compiler code for this but would bet that >> currently there is no step disallowing such an assignment. >> > > Well, there is. As you noticed you cannot assign []Age to []int because > the compiler complains. So by matter of fact there is a step which > disallows it. > > I'm curiously following your post but I have to admit I cannot > make much sense of them. There is a language specification > which describes what is allowed and what not. That is not really > uncommon, there are specifications for most other languages > starting from what a Turing machine is and which transitions > are allowed to Brainfuck, various assembly languages, the whole > C-family with various dialect of C, C++, Java, the Lisp-family, > Haskell, you name it. All are governed by a specification and > none allows everything which might be technically feasible. Like > everything in life there are tradeoffs and different people make > different tradeoffs. The Go creators decided on a set of tradeoffs. > I think it is okay to ask _why_ it was decided this or that way, this > helps understanding the language and it's intentions. Several > people with deep understanding of the language itself and how it > is implemented explained to you the rationale behind various > decisions taken during the design of the language specification > and I'm feeling uncomfortable with your harsh rejections of any > explanation given. Especially if rejected based on guessing or > betting. >
I don't deny the rules. I am just curious about the reason behind the rules. I really don't like your attitude. > > V. > -- 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.