It's been many years since I was involved in developing complex systems (C++ and Java). But I agree, it was mostly lists and sets with searching and sorting. But I also used them for algorithms a good bit. Thus I would guess that the maintainers of GONUM libraries might benefit (anyone confirm?).
I haven't seen many libraries developed in Go yet, but I think it likely many would benefit from generics. And I think it could simple and readable. I tend to think of it as an analogue to `go generate`. The latter is for package *authors*... a similar feature for package *users *is all that is needed. On Sunday, July 30, 2017 at 5:08:46 PM UTC-4, David Collier-Brown wrote: > > I came to Go from languages that had generics, but in practice I find that > I predominantly used list-of and set-of. And I spent a dispropriate > amount of time with valgrind making sure my C++ list didn't have leaks (:-() > > A question to people who use Java/C++ and friends: what generics do you > find you use in *production* programs? > > --dave > -- 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.
