crtc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs since the author seems to be confused in this regard.

It accesses the module proxy proxy.golang.org, which is run by Google. If you want to opt-out of this module mirror, you can turn it off by setting GOPROXY=direct.

The proxy has a clear privacy policy: https://proxy.golang.org/privacy It collects anonymized usage metrics like other package registries (rubygems.org, nuget.org, crates.io) do.

True, I quickly checked

https://rubygems.org/

https://www.nuget.org/packages

https://crates.io/

... they all show download statistics of their packages.

His name is really Sims?

This is by design: https://go.dev/doc/faq#Does_Go_have_a_ternary_form

Ken Thompson added ?: to B / C and then he took it from us in Go due to the wisdom he gathered in between.

Finally! This will be the last day I see the words "Go" "lack of"/"no" and "generics" in one sentence.

Yes, but reflection is part of the problem:

"And even that traversal is not sufficient in the general case when type reflection gets involved, as reflection might look up methods based on strings input by the user. So in general instantiating parameterized methods in the linker might require instantiating every parameterized method for every possible type argument, which seems untenable."

So methods with type parameters would a) not be usable with interfaces and b) not be usable with reflection.

The release notes usually contain everything.

> No mention of why they left them out in non-interface types.

Actually it does:

"Or, we could decide that parameterized methods do not, in fact, implement interfaces, but then it's much less clear why we need methods at all. If we disregard interfaces, any parameterized method can be implemented as a parameterized function."

https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/des...

On a somewhat unrelated note: What consequences did the Rust mod team resignation lead to? The last thing I heard was the blog post: https://blog.rust-lang.org/inside-rust/2021/11/25/in-respons...

But I haven't seen any public discussions on the future of Rust governance, how to make the core team accountable, or other consequences since.

I hope it is. I wouldn't trust a seven-month-old to drive my car.

Why should they fold if no government outlaws it.

> Back in the '90s, "Object-Oriented" got redefined in popular imagination to "good". If your language or system was good, it was then by definition object-oriented, and anything good had therefore to be called OO. Saying something was not actually OO (as we find here) was taken to mean it was not good, generating spurious conflict.

A similar thing happened with functional programming.

> there would be some confusion with the popular Chicken Scheme compiler.

Or Agda (the hen): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPY42kkRADc

It's more people having a platform to speak out about how they feel.

In German C# is pronounced "C Lattenzaun" or "C Schweinegatter", which is quite a mouthful.

> with types you need way less unit tests

It's a misconception that developers who use dynamically typed programming languages write tests that perform tasks of a static type system. They do not write tests like this:

    assertException(() => upcase(12));
    assertException(() => upcase(true));
    assertException(() => upcase(null));
    assertException(() => upcase(new Object()));
    ...

They write tests like

    assertEquals("TEST", upcase("test"));
    assertEquals("HELLO, WORLD", upcase("hElLo, wOrLd"));
    assertEquals("BLA123", upcase("bla123"));

TIL a new word: megamorphic

What about "Old Car Smell'?

Can this be transferred to programming languages like ALGOL?

How can "Rassenschande" be a Nazi slogan? How can "Herrenvolk" be a Nazi slogan?

> But that often comes with slow implementation/decision costs.

It also comes with feature bloat.

> I see very few complaints

If you live in a filter bubble (survivorship bias).

He's joining Mozilla to fix Rust.

What's the matter with this stupid word "blazingly" in the Rust community?