Hacker News Reader

Comment by dom96 | Hacker News Reader

Maybe instead of adding generics to Go it's time to look into alternative programming languages which already implement generics, like for example Nim.

View on HN

You forgot that most of golangers are ex-php programmers and students with no experience. Just look at what they're talking about: they think generics are the opposite of simplicity and can make performance and compilation time worse. Meanwhile, Nim has generics with other useful features and has faster compilation time along with better optimization. If google would put 'goto' into go golangers would still use it anyway.

I've tried go a few times and it was full with repetition and boilerplate - felt like java 1.0. It seems like new coders like to repeat themselves more often than learn how to use proven concepts.

Go does have 'goto'.

https://golang.org/ref/spec#Goto_statements

> You forgot that most of golangers are ex-php programmers and students with no experience.

How hopelessly smug and incorrect.

It's a conversation about go, isn't being smug and/or incorrect fundamental to participating?

Maybe Go does things Nim doesn't.

What things? Care to elaborate?

interfaces

Look at Nim's concept(http://nim-lang.org/docs/manual.html#generics-concepts), it can do more than a regular interface.

Edit: here is how they look like, concept vs interface:

1. Nim: http://ideone.com/wn3Kzf 2. Go: http://ideone.com/fRrB05

Nim has generics but doesn't have interfaces, which makes things even worse in my opinion.

True. But Nim does have type classes, which in some ways are much better. Interfaces like the ones in Go can be easily emulated using closures.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com