Hacker News Reader

How is code with generics more complex than without it?

For example the C++ templates rules are themselves a turing-complete language. If by generics you meant some really basic features, I think you can do pretty well with interfaces. They're already in the language. If by generics you meant the full-package, i think you could end up with something pretty complex all the time.

Most generic implementations are not Turing-complete, and looking at C++, this doesn't sound like a particularly tempting proposition.

And while I'm not particularly familiar with Go, I don't see how you can get a feature set equivalent to a simple implementation like Java's out of Go interfaces ("you can just cast" is not a good answer).

I'm probably missing the use case. What is the problem that you are thinking of, you can't solve with a Go interface?

Say, a generic container.

They're talking about the compiler and the language spec not Go code.

That's not how I interpret parent's comment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com