I upvoted the question to offset one of the downs because I agree it's a fair qu... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		freedomben on Sept 19, 2023 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Fixing for loops in Go 1.22 I upvoted the question to offset one of the downs because I agree it's a fair question. However I would guess the downvotes are because TFA addressed this issue directly and comprehensively, so it's a clear "I didn't read the article" indicator :-) Possibly also because the downvoters can't imagine a scenario where this would be desirable behavior (i.e. it's always a bug)

colejohnson66 on Sept 19, 2023 | [–]

But if it’s a bug, then the logic to not compile future versions is wrong, IMO. If it’s a feature change, then such logic would make sense.

campbel on Sept 19, 2023 | [–]

Yeah its fair, I didn't closely read that section. Although, I'm not entirely convinced the approach is safe, maybe its worth it to fix such a common pitfall.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact