Yes. It would be short-sighted to dismiss them out of hand, and it's possible that generics will provide a level of expressiveness and readability I haven't anticipated yet. I'm fairly bearish on it for now.
It's entirely possible that, through some strange quirks of circumstance, I've managed to avoid every problem space that would make me wish for generics.
In spite of that, it's unlikely that I've written implementations where using interface{} would be easier to read and reason about than not using interface{}. And the experience of the author whose blog post we're commenting on tracks with mine: "In my 5+ years working in Go, I can probably count on one hand the number of times that I felt like I really needed generics." I can too, just without using any fingers :-)
I have never needed generics in Go, and I've probably been using it since 2017. I've never even once had to resort to any interface{} trickery to express what I want, and I've written Go programs for Fortune 50 companies, as well as complex personal projects such as AST parsers/code generators.
I'm pretty disappointed to see generics introduced into the language and every example I've seen feels completely unreadable to me compared to pre-generics implementations.
To be clear, it has never been the case that the Golang authors were 100% against generics. It has always been their position that the implementation needed to be good enough to make the trade-offs worthwhile. I just don't think they chose the right trade-offs.
Most Zoomers have already accepted that they are not going to have children or live very long.
I think following their example is the best one can do on an individual level. It’s baby’s first civilization and it’s over. Acceptance at least allows one some dignity.
What problem is this solving? NYC doesn't have a problem with people either not being able to drive or not knowing where they're going. We have workable (for an American definition of workable) mass transit and several livery services including taxis and Uber.
We're trying to get rid of cars here. Congestion pricing, the widening of pedestrian and biking thoroughfares, just to name two initiatives. We don't need more cars, regardless whether or not they're being human-driven or not.
Less a "late response" and more the start of keeping a promise made by Jobs in 2010 to make FaceTime an cross-platform product supported by open standards, that was hampered by various legal I/P battles: https://www.imore.com/wheres-facetime-android
It supports many more kinds of secure data than passwords and credit cards. It has specific entry types for bank accounts, passports, reward programs, software licenses, and so on.
It also has lots of built in analysis tools for determining:
- which of your passwords are reused, weak, or present in online password dumps
- what websites can have 2FA enabled on them
As well as the ability to store entire documents in vaults.
Been using 1Password since 2008 and it's the only software of its kind I recommend to anyone on any platform.
You're confusing Joel/StackOverflow for Jeff Atwood, who posted on the forums while designing Discourse.
Atwood was lambasted for not understanding the SA forums culture before making assertions about it, and for being seen as wanting to ignore the necessary role that human moderation plays in maintaining strong communities.
"What people say they will do when there's no cost associated with an action and what people will actually do once a cost IS associated with the same action are frequently 2 different things."
This statement makes it sound like you think that Google employees are unable to attach a cost to leaving the company until they actually commit the act. Am I misunderstanding? Because that's obviously not true.
The riots last summer didn't involve insurrectionists violently invading the seat of power of the legislative branch with live ammunition intent on disrupting the peaceful transfer of power in a democratic republic.