I don’t know about threatening to leave Go, but I’ve definitely seen a lot of posts claiming Go is better without generics.
Re:Go 2, here we come
by stcredzero on Thursday November 29, 2018 @10:34PM
(#18566428)
The more nuanced and better side of that is that any language is better without badly designed and badly implemented generics.
Maybe the even more nuanced side is that a language that can't conjure a safe and well designed generic has a badly designed type system in the first place
Re:Go 2, here we come
by stcredzero on Friday December 07, 2018 @12:07PM
(#18629352)
That sounds axiomatic.
How would you define "badly designed?" I can imagine a context where the "well designed" type system is very plain.
Baffled at this claim I searched and found one person who really seemed to be saying "if Go changes dramatically...".
This recurring notion that Go fans are anti-generic is not rooted in reality. Instead they simply didn't buy the "either it's there or the language is useless -- generics or bust!" argument that pops up in every Go discussion. It's a fine, if imperfect, language without generics. It's a better language with them.