Hacker News Reader

I think that Java can definitely provide significantly more protection than Go, but I do agree that Java's horrible namespacing conventions and lack of type inference makes it cumbersome.

So what, you're on par with a 20 year old language? C# for example learned from Java's mistakes; why couldn't Go?

View on HN

I think I just don't come across situations where I find myself needing generics in the software that I typically write. I can imagine it would suck in those situations. There is a workaround for it, though. Basically you write a template and do code generation off of that to sort of approximate generics. I've never done it myself, though.

> I think I just don't come across situations where I find myself needing generics in the software that I typically write.

You don't need generics, sure. You can write working code in assembly, too. But abstractions catch more of your mistakes for you.

> There is a workaround for it, though. Basically you write a template and do code generation off of that to sort of approximate generics. I've never done it myself, though.

So, basically slightly more powerful macros, like in C, with most of the pitfalls and dangers associated with them.

There are better approaches to these problems.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com