package level generics

package level generics.md

Package level generics may look less confusing.

package abc(Key,Value)

contract CompileCheck(a1 Key, a2 Value) {
	//...
}

type Pair struct {
	K Key
	V Value
}

func NewPair(k Key, v Value) Pair {
	return Pair{K: k, V: v}
}

package xyz

import "abc(int32,float32)" myabc

func newPair() myabc.Pair {
	return myabc.NewPair(1, 1.0)
}

Introduce two step compilation. Firstly create abc[Key,Value].lib from source. Then create abc(int32,float32).a from abc[Key,Value].lib . Both abc[Key,Value].lib and abc(int32,float32).a can be saved to reduce next compilation time.

Support the idea of package-level generics.
It keeps the code clean and simple, unlike to C++ generics where you have to type in plenty of places making code a mess.
It also allows to keep call traces readable, by adding types to file names, rather then functions (which are long lines already).

Hi, I've got some comment about your idea.

Why not directly

package abc type (Key, Value)

I tried to make it impossible that define both abc(K,V) and abc(X,Y).
You are right. It's a better to let the compiler show an error in such cases.