[shakow]

> The whole reason we say “X is like Y” instead of “X is the same as Y” is because X is not the same as Y

Being able to change the underlying data is a pretty big difference. Technically, their only solid common point is that they address contiguous spaces in memory.

> you cite C++ as some kind of gold standard

I never did; I highlighted the difference between immutable views vs. whatever Go slices are.

> I think you’ve lost the plot

No need for the snark there.

[klodolph]

> Technically, their only solid common point is that they address contiguous spaces in memory.

That’s a very major thing to have in common. Definitely not a minor detail, for sure.

[shakow]

When you're comparing two cars, the fact that both have four wheels and drive on a road is not that compelling.

[klodolph]

In this scenario, we are comparing two cars, a bicycle, a jet ski, and three types of airplane. Yes, the cars are similar, within that context. Many languages, like Python and Java, do not have an array slice type. And the similarities between C++, Rust, and Go are relevant—the length is a property of the slice itself, and since the slice is passed by value, it is not modified by a function that accepts a slice as an argument, even if the objects the slice point to are modified by that function.

If you see a different context, then you misinterpreted what I wrote.

It is easy—trivial, even—to imagine scenarios where a particular “X is like Y” does not make sense. What you should do, as a reader, is try and understand what the writer means, rather than try to figure out some way to interpret a comment so that it is wrong, in your view.

The easy way out—saying “X is not like Y because of difference Z”—does not meaningfully contribute to the discussion.