Quoting Eric Raymond (2018-10-16 17:28:11)
> Fair enough. But is there any way to have a contract system of *any*
> kind that doesn't have the identical problem?�
Linked elsewhere in this thread, but I sketched something that I think
does the trick:
https://gist.github.com/zenhack/ad508d08c72fce6df945a49945ad826d
As written it punts on operator overloading, but I think given the
solution you've described re: ==, it can be updated to support it.
-Ian
--
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.
