OOP Features

[lesichkovm]

This will probably very controversial. I've often thought it would be useful to have object-oriented programming (OOP) features like classes in Go. It would open up more possibilities for certain types of projects. And also result in Improved code organization, enhanced expressiveness, increased flexibility.

[dingo-reviewer]

@lesichkovm I see where you're coming from, but this cuts against a core Dingo constraint: transpiled Go code must remain idiomatic. Go deliberately uses structs + interfaces instead of classes, and Dingo's job is to add sugar on top of Go's existing model, not replace it.

Dingo already gives you things that make Go's composition model more ergonomic:

• Enums/sum types for modeling variants (features/INDEX.md shows these as implemented)
• Pattern matching for dispatching on those types
• Lambdas for cleaner callback patterns

What specifically are you trying to express that structs + interfaces + embedding can't handle? That'd help figure out if there's a targeted feature (like default method implementations or trait-style sugar) that could actually transpile cleanly to Go.