Re:Fixing for Loops in Go 1.22
by akira2501 on Tuesday September 19, 2023 @04:29PM
(#37576073)
> How many other badly designed features exist in the language, and are simply not being acknowledged?
Very few.
> If you point it out, and you're right, will you be heard if you don't have a flashy metric to point to, like a billion dollars lost?
If you're right yet don't have a better idea then what do you expect to occur?
> What if the link between it and its consequences isn't that clear, but the consequences are just as grave?
The consequence is your developers must be careful with loop variables or they will introduce bugs. That's not particularly "grave" nor even especially novel.
I'll admit, it's not a good ivory tower language, but then again, that's probably why I use it so often. It gets the job done and it doesn't waste my time with useless hypothetical features.
Very few.
> If you point it out, and you're right, will you be heard if you don't have a flashy metric to point to, like a billion dollars lost?
If you're right yet don't have a better idea then what do you expect to occur?
> What if the link between it and its consequences isn't that clear, but the consequences are just as grave?
The consequence is your developers must be careful with loop variables or they will introduce bugs. That's not particularly "grave" nor even especially novel.
I'll admit, it's not a good ivory tower language, but then again, that's probably why I use it so often. It gets the job done and it doesn't waste my time with useless hypothetical features.