On 20 May 2017, at 17:01, bcandler100 via golang-nuts
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> And I wonder why the language designers decided not to allow this:
>
> if err {
> ...
> }
>
> especially since Go has a well-defined notion of "zero value" which could be
> treated as "false" in this context.
Implicit type conversion is necessarily a thing in dynamically typed languages.
Having empty dicts and so on be false can be convenient but also confusing. I
assume you mean that a nil slice in Go would false, for example. Would the
empty slice also be false? A zero length slice? A slice containing only zero
values? A zero sync.Mutex or bytes.Buffer? Those are both usable in their zero
state and having them be false would enable some really confusing antipatterns.
I don't think we'd have to wait long for the first
If !mut {
mut.Lock()
}
to appear, for example.
//jb
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
