On 28 July 2016 at 15:11, Mark Shuttleworth <[email protected]> wrote: > On 28/07/16 13:47, roger peppe wrote: >> I agree with that. But we're talking about sugar here, I think. Added >> sugar doesn't *necessarily* imply a cleaner, less messy or better >> articulated component IMHO. That's one of the reasons I like Go - more >> layers of abstraction can make things harder to reason about, although >> equally they can sometimes really help. > > We're not talking about sugar. > > Look at your example - it got *shorter* when hand crafted. That's *less* > fluff.
With respect, that's exactly what syntactic sugar does. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntactic_sugar In particular "... a construct in a language is called syntactic sugar if it can be removed from the language without any effect on what the language can do: functionality and expressive power will remain the same." Sweetness is always a matter of taste however, so thanks for your guidance in this matter. "No auto-generated public APIs" seems like a reasonable rule to follow. cheers, rog. -- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
