Is that really true though? You can have one package that defines min/max for the built-in types (because it uses operators), and then one that uses method(s) Less() and Equals() that works with generics.
A similar technique can be used in sorting. -----Original Message----- >From: David Riley <fraveyd...@gmail.com> >Sent: May 31, 2019 9:05 AM >To: Robert Johnstone <r.w.johnst...@gmail.com> >Cc: golang-nuts <golang-nuts@googlegroups.com> >Subject: Re: [go-nuts] Go 2 generics counterproposal: giving up restricting >types > >Because Min and Max are very good and simple indicators of whether the >mechanism is generic enough to handle a fairly common idiom: small functions >for similarly behaved items, say comparable items, which are annoying and >repetitive to write for every data type which might support the operation (not >to mention the fact that increases the surface area for errors). > >It's also worth noting that if Min and Max can't be written in a generic >system, it's likely that Sort can't, either. > >If the purpose of a generic system is to reduce repetitive code in a readable >way, it's probably not doing its job very well if it can't do Min and Max. >They're good canaries. > > >- Dave > > >> On May 31, 2019, at 9:06 AM, Robert Johnstone <r.w.johnst...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I'm not sure that Min and Max need to be in the 80%. It's annoying to write >> them repeatedly, but they are also very short. The place where I typically >> miss generics is larger chunks of code, such as concurrency patterns. I'm >> certain others are looking at datatypes. Why do Min and Max need to be in >> the 80%? >> >> Robert >> >> >> On Thursday, 30 May 2019 14:26:34 UTC-4, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> One of my guidelines for an acceptable generics proposal is that >> people can write Min and Max. Your proposal admits that it doesn't >> permit that. I think that is a problem. I'm fine with the general >> idea of "do 80% of the job" but in practice people really do want to >> write Min and Max. I think they are part of the 80% that needs to be >> handled, not the 20% that can be omitted. >> >> -- >> 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. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/e91e761e-92cd-452a-a387-e0741ebacd66%40googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > >-- >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. >To view this discussion on the web visit >https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/A5807C0F-B951-45A1-9EBE-00629FE40B22%40gmail.com. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/176439122.1772.1559317546587%40wamui-hyena.atl.sa.earthlink.net. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
