I agree
--
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.
Not all languages use <> for parametric parametrism. I tried lots of
variants and my favorite is [] from Scala (I don't like Scala, BTW).
четверг, 18 июня 2020 г., 11:15:16 UTC+3 пользователь Nathanael Curin
написал:
>
> An argument for this is also that (all ?) languages that use generics use
On Thursday, 18 June 2020 10:15:16 UTC+2, Nathanael Curin wrote:
>
> An argument for this is also that (all ?) languages that use generics use
> <>. It might make learning just easier for new Go developers that have
> experience from generics-compatible languages.
>
And an argument against usin
An argument for this is also that (all ?) languages that use generics use
<>. It might make learning just easier for new Go developers that have
experience from generics-compatible languages.
Dimas -> Resembling other languages in some ways is not necessarily a bad
thing, if the idea behind it
>
> makes it easier to visual parse
>
Are you sure? It may be a personal thing, but "visual parsing" of these <<<
really annoys me, I would prefer `[]`, but I like `()` more than `<>`. In
addition, a good IDE (not that well known overhyped editor on steroids)
will highlight these fragments, so
