You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I think templating (parameterization) by type at the package/import level is better than at the function level. Although you seem to have not exactly done either, or both. In any case it looks much better than the C++ style of templates.
How would one do a variety of in-order, depth-first et cetera walking of trees or graphs and putting elements or their pointers into a linear list or array? Or fed to a channel?
I was imagining something like:
import "redblack".{{Goober}} with Type {{Thing}} as Type Goober, const {{Max}} as 512
This could have several things as parameters, which would be useful. Being careful not to have multiple generated packages with the same name.
Supporting containers and algorithms but leaving aside meta-programming seems like the right idea.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think templating (parameterization) by type at the package/import level is better than at the function level. Although you seem to have not exactly done either, or both. In any case it looks much better than the C++ style of templates.
import "redblack".{{Goober}} with Type {{Thing}} as Type Goober, const {{Max}} as 512
This could have several things as parameters, which would be useful. Being careful not to have multiple generated packages with the same name.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: