News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Things Go needs more than generics. Parent comment

Re:Things Go needs more than generics by unscaled on Monday October 04, 2021 @07:16AM (#28745281)
This situation is unfortunately quite hard to avoid in the languages above since they either added null safety (or indeed any kind of type-checking) at a later stage (C# and Python) or they need to maintain compatibility with a language or platform that is not null-safe (Kotlin with Java, Swift with Objective C, TypeScript with JavaScript).

Languages like Rust, Haskell or ML do not have this issue since they do not need to support such a legacy layer.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Things Go needs more than generics by pjmlp on Monday October 04, 2021 @07:45AM (#28745474)
Kind of true, there is still the possibility to smuggle null values via unsafe, or FFI, but then the fault is on whoever certified the code as safe.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Things Go needs more than generics by unscaled on Monday October 04, 2021 @09:29PM (#28754505)
I was hesitating whether to mention unsafe code blocks or FFI, but the no language that gets thing done can avoid abuse of its escape hatches. Even Haskell has to deal with nulls when doing FFI.
[ Parent | on HN ]