Yes, thank you. Everybody in this thread already knows that. PICK ONE.
(EDIT: I should also add: Since Go is structually typed and has mutable variables, that should be a good indication of what to do and what not to do. See e.g. Java arrays, variance and covarince.)
> If imperative programming is the best choice for Google, that doesn't mean the community wouldn't be better served by functional programming, so to speak. And when it comes to generics, there are quite a few different paradigms that can be used, and not easily mixed-and-matched. They are asking for use-cases to determine which generics paradigm fits not only the needs at Google, but the needs everywhere.
And now you're trying to bring imperative vs. functional into this?
I think IHBT... and this really is my last comment in this thread. Have a good $WHATEVER.
They are picking one, based on the use-cases that will be given to them in the near future. I don't understand what your point is here.
> Since Go is structually typed and has mutable variables, that should be a good indication of what to do and what not to do.
That may be true, but the worst case scenario is that they learn nothing from the examples they get. You don't have to provide any if you feel it is a useless endeavour. If it gives them comfort, so be it.
> And now you're trying to bring imperative vs. functional into this?
It wasn't clear if you understood what I meant by there being different ways to provide generics. I struggled to write it as eloquently as I had hoped and the analogy was meant to bridge what gaps may have existed.
It's almost like communication can be difficult. Where have I see that before? Hmm...
> It's almost like communication can be difficult.
We can agree about that! :)
> Where have I see that before? Hmm...
Not sure what you mean (ironically?).
Have a good night :).