[Galene] Re: OT: generics [was: Heads up: Galene now requires Go 1.16]

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 9:18 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:
>
> > btw, what are your feelings about go generics?
>
> They are smartly done, unlike C++ generics they don't impose a single
> implementation strategy.  They're done in Church style (where
> instantiation consists in passing a type parameter), while I tend to
> prefer Curry style (where instantiation is modelled as a case of
> subtyping).  They don't support specialisation (where the user writes
> a specially optimised implementation for the types they really care
> about), which might or might not be a limitation.

I hope they evolve. This was a very disappointing analysis of go generics:

https://planetscale.com/blog/generics-can-make-your-go-code-slower

However, the rust version of generics is essentially programming the
AST directly and if I really wanted a lisp, I'd have stuck with lisp.
I didn't care for C++ much, but BOOST was a bright light in it.

>
> We'll see if we get any nice libraries.  I'd love to see an implementation
> of B-trees with good cache locality that is type-safe and efficient at all
> types.
>
> -- Juliusz



-- 
FQ World Domination pending: https://blog.cerowrt.org/post/state_of_fq_codel/
Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC