The more I use #golang the more I find its nearly complete lack of a type system, and associated verbosity, inexcusable.
@TardisX I can overlook things like that, but the fundament inability to express such common constructs as “a list of things and I don’t care what they are” or “a function that can take a value of the same type as the struct it’s attached to” is just ridiculous.
@cercerilla I am still at the “baby steps” stage with #golang and this process contains many instances of “wow, that’s weird”. I expect to graduate to “wow, that’s annoying” RSN.
To be fair, this happens with every new language and it’s all part of the fun.
@cercerilla types are for weirdos, real programmers use the empty interface for List<t>.
@cercerilla the thing that really gets me is that interface{} isn't erased or monomorphized… nope, gotta unbox everything at runtime. -_-
@cercerilla for me it’s the “public members start with a capital” that really rubs me the wrong way.