proposal VS avendish

The conclusion is pretty weird to me.

Go does rely on monomorphization for generics, just like C++ and Rust. The only difference is that this is an implementation detail, so Go can group multiple monomorphizations without worrying about anything else [1]. This form of hybrid monomorphization is being increasingly common, GHC does that and Rust is also trying to do so [2], so nothing special for Go here.

On the other hand, explaining variance as a lifted polymorphism is---while not incorrect per se---also weird in part because a lack of variance is at worst just an annoyance. You can always make an adopter to unify heterogeneous types. Rust calls it `Box`, Go happens to call it an interface type instead. Both languages even do not allow heterogeneous concrete (or runtime) types in a single slice! So variance has no use in both languages because no concrete types are eligible for variance anyway.

I think the conclusion got weird because the term "subtyping" is being misused. Subtyping, in the broadest sense, is just a non-trivial type relation. Many languages thus have a multiple notion of subtyping, often (almost) identical to each other but sometimes not. Go in particular has a lot of them, and even some relation like "T implements U" is a straightforward record subtyping. It is no surprise that the non-uniform value representation has the largest influence, and only monomorphization schemes and hetero-to-homogeneous adapters vary in this particular group.

[1] https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/generi...

[2] https://rust-lang.github.io/compiler-team/working-groups/pol...

https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/generi...

Go Team wanted generics since the start. It was always a problem implementing them without severely hurting compile time and creating compilation bloat. Rust chose to ignore this problem, by relying on LLVM backend for optimizations and dead code elimination.

Hold up, did the members actually push this forward or was support just often memed about and suddenly this proposal was made: https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/43651-type-parameters.md

As far as I can tell, the consensus for generics was "it will happen, but we really want to get this right, and it's taking time."

I know some people did the knee-jerk attacks like "Go sucks, it should have had generics long ago" or "Go is fine, it doesn't need generics". I don't think we ever needed to take those attitudes seriously.

> Will error handling be overhauled or not?

Error handling is a thorny issue. It's the biggest complaint people have about Go, but I don't think that exceptions are obviously better, and the discriminated unions that power errors in Rust and some other languages are conspicuously absent from Go. So you end up with a bunch of different proposals for Go error handling that are either too radical or little more than syntactic sugar. The syntactic sugar proposals leave much to be desired. It looks like people are slowly grinding through these proposals until one is found with the right balance to it.

I honestly don't know what kind of changes to error handling would appear in Go 2 if/when it lands, and I think the only reasonable answer right now is "wait and find out". You can see a more reasonable proposal here:

https://github.com/golang/proposal/blob/master/design/go2dra...

Characterizing it as a "lack of vision" does not seem fair here--I started using Rust back in the days when boxed pointers had ~ on them, and it seemed like it took Rust a lot of iterations to get to the current design. Which is fine. I am also never quite sure what is going to get added to future versions of C#.

I am also not quite sure why Go gets so much hate on Hacker News--as far as I can tell, people have more or less given up on criticizing Java and C# (it's not like they've ossified), and C++ is enough of a dumpster fire that it seems gauche to point it out.

There will almost certainly not be a Go 2 in that sense. There is a Go 2 transition doc which extensively discusses what "Go 2" means. The conclusion is

As it says on that page - those were not proposals. They were draft ideas to get feedback on. You can see the list of proposals in this repository: https://github.com/golang/proposal

Approximately a year ago we faced with a necessity of limiting Go runtime memory consumption and started work on our own memory limiter. At the same time, Michael Knyszek published his well-known proposal. Now we have our own implementation quite similar to what has been released in 1.18, but there are two key differences:

Happy to introduce you to https://ossia.io there are a lots of tasks open! You can check the projects for the general development axes: https://github.com/ossia/score/projects?query=is%3Aopen ; e.g. Audio, Musicality, Integrations, JACK & Linux integration (some are in Classic projects mode) all have audio-related tasks, some easy, some hard.

Creating new Avendish plug-ins (docs: https://celtera.github.io/avendish/) could also be fairly useful, here's a very basic example one: https://github.com/celtera/avendish/blob/main/examples/Advan...

If you are interested in making max, pd, etc... extension you can look into https://github.com/celtera/avendish : it's made exactly for this and tries to stay very close from standard C++ unlike most existing audio frameworks which often come with their own bespoke standard library reimplementation. The documentation also tries to explain the c++ features it used, you might find this useful!

to automatically generate safe dlopen stubs for runtime dynamic library loading from header files

and through the C++ one (this one is an extremely quick and dirty prototype):

https://github.com/ossia/score/blob/master/src/plugins/score...

to pre-instantiate get(aggregate), for_each(aggregate, f) and other similar functions in https://github.com/celtera/avendish because of how slow it is when done through TMP (doing it that way removed literally dozens of megabytes from my .o and had a positive performance impact even with -O3) ; so I weep a lot when I read that people in the committee object to pack...[indexing]

I really don't know about this, I'm writing audio & media effects in a fairly declarative style with https://github.com/celtera/avendish and I'm so much more productive that it's not even funny - I can rewrite entire effects from scratch in the time that it used to take me to find a bug somewhere

For anyone using c++, my declarative system has some amount of support for clap: https://github.com/celtera/avendish / https://celtera.github.io/avendish/

But unlike clap, targetting this also gives direct access to a few other environments, namely Max, Pd, ossia score, with the list hopefully growing.

Here is an example minimal plugin : https://github.com/celtera/avendish/blob/main/examples/Raw/M...

Note that unlike pretty much every other c/c++ plugin API, the plugin code does not need to include any header, everything is done through reflection of struct members at compile-time.

Here's a per-sample noise generator which uses a small library of pre-made ports: https://github.com/celtera/avendish/blob/main/examples/Helpe...

And a very naive buffer-based audio filter : https://github.com/celtera/avendish/blob/main/examples/Helpe...

UI is supported without relying on a specific UI library, only on a canvas painter concept which can then target Qt, NanoVG, and others to come: https://github.com/celtera/avendish/blob/main/examples/Helpe...

since it binds directly to audio APIs at compile time, it has pretty much zero code size in itself, the smallest plugin it generates for VST2 is around 7kb IIRC

I've ported my lib https://github.com/celtera/avendish to P1061's experimental clang implementation to replace boost.pfr (https://github.com/celtera/avendish/blob/main/include/avnd/common/aggregates.hpp#L67) and it works great, it's only missing pack indexing because right now one still needs to do something like

Working on a sunset of this with https://github.com/celtera/avendish - C++ reflection makes this very easy

so interesting, as a mostly C++ dev, UE's C++ style feels absolutely awful aha. Of course they have to be here because c++ used to not have reflection but I think that nowadays one could use similar principles as the ones I've tried to develop for audio / media objects in https://github.com/celtera/avendish to implement game objects / UObject in a much cleaner way and with better compile times