On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 4:04 AM Leonard Mittmann
wrote:
>>
>> As to _why_ this is the case, the generics proposal has a section about that:
>> https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/design/43651-type-parameters.md#permitting-constraints-as-ordinary-interface-types
>
> @Jason
>
> As to _why_ this is the case, the generics proposal has a section about
> that:
>
> https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/design/43651-type-parameters.md#permitting-constraints-as-ordinary-interface-types
@Jason Phillips Thanks for pointing me here.
@Ian Lance Taylor I
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 3:24 AM Leonard Mittmann
wrote:
>
> I just learned that type constraints, which are defined as interfaces are
> actually not usable in all the places "normal" interfaces can be used in.
> E.g., why can a constraint interface not be uses as a struct type?
>
> Let's say I
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 8:29 AM Brian Hatfield wrote:
>
> I read that and I genuinely do not understand why interfaces now mean two
> distinct incompatible things. I think this is going to confuse a lot of
> people.
This is perhaps pedantic, but the two meanings are not incompatible.
The set
A function which takes a value of an interface type, and a function which
takes a value of a constrained generic type, are certainly two different
things.
In the first case, it gets a dynamic boxed value which at runtime may
contain a value of any type that implements that interface - or no
I read that and I genuinely do not understand why interfaces now mean two
distinct incompatible things. I think this is going to confuse a lot of
people.
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 11:09 AM Jason Phillips
wrote:
> As to _why_ this is the case, the generics proposal has a section about
> that:
>
>
As to _why_ this is the case, the generics proposal has a section about
that:
https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/design/43651-type-parameters.md#permitting-constraints-as-ordinary-interface-types
On Wednesday, December 15, 2021 at 11:05:36 AM UTC-5 Jason Phillips wrote:
>
@Leonard, type constraints can only be used as type parameters, using them
as normal interfaces is currently not allowed. See the notes in the draft
release notes[1] or the draft 1.18 spec[2].
> Such interfaces may only be used as type constraints.
> Interfaces that contain non-interface
This was asked 15 hours ago in the thread with the subject line "Go 1.18
beta1: Embedding Type Parameter in struct definition is an error". :-)
See https://golang.org/issue/49030.
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 3:24 AM Leonard Mittmann
wrote:
> I just learned that type constraints, which are defined
I just learned that type constraints, which are defined as interfaces are
actually not usable in all the places "normal" interfaces can be used in.
E.g., why can a constraint interface not be uses as a struct type?
Let's say I have the func `func Smallest[T constraints.Ordered](s []T) T`.
How
10 matches
Mail list logo
