News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Expectations for generics in Go 1.18. Parent comment

Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18 by mseepgood on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @11:49PM (#29022176)
But that will make error handling more verbose.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18 by stouset on Thursday October 28, 2021 @12:38AM (#29022436)
Speaking as a user of languages that have exactly this, it can’t possibly be any worse than the situation in Go right now.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18 by mseepgood on Thursday October 28, 2021 @04:30AM (#29023724)
Other languages have an additional zoo of language syntax besides generics to make monadic error handling bearable, which Go doesn't have.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18 by mohanmcgeek on Thursday October 28, 2021 @07:23AM (#29024741)
It'll make it unmanageable by hiding complexity.

But more verbose? I'm not so sure.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18 by mseepgood on Thursday October 28, 2021 @08:55AM (#29025507)
Passing a single anonymous function is already more characters to type than if err != nil {}.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Expectations for generics in Go 1.18 by EdwardDiego on Thursday October 28, 2021 @02:48AM (#29023140)
Will it?

I can't see it myself, but happy to educate myself.

[ Parent | on HN ]