[Animats]

Two more levels of blogs down, the actual proposal.[1] Definition:

    // Print has a type parameter T and has a single (non-type)
    // parameter s which is a slice of that type parameter.
    func Print[T any](s []T) { ... }

Call:

    Print[int]([]int{1, 2, 3})

Above, "any" is really just a synonym for "interface{}". You can have more restrictive type constraints on parameterized types by specifying other Go interfaces. This is vaguely similar to how Rust does it, and quite different from the C++ approach.

"This design does not support template metaprogramming or any other form of compile time programming."

[1] https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/des...

[fanf2]

My understanding from the “Featherweight Go” paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11710 is that generic types will not simply be a synonym for interface{} because the compiler will be able to monomorphize them - they do not require dynamic dispatch like interfaces.

[mseepgood]

> My understanding from the “Featherweight Go” paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11710 is that generic types will not simply be a synonym for interface{}

The `any` constraint is a synonym for the `interface{}` constraint.

[oconnor663]

I think the comment above meant that the `any` keyword specifically is a synonym for `interface{}`, not that all generic types will be.

[lights0123]

(also C++ concepts)