> From my perspective, Go added methods primarily so that you can use them in combination with interfaces.
They also give you a limited form of overloading. Without methods or overloading, you end up in the situation that C and Scheme are in where every operation on a data structure has to redundantly have the data structure in its name like:
list_clear(my_list);
queue_clear(my_queue);
map_clear(my_map);> Without methods or overloading, you end up in the situation that C and Scheme are in
Well in C at least we now have this:
#define clear(s) _Generic((s) \
,struct list: list_clear \
,struct queue: queue_clear \
,struct map: map_clear \
)(s)
clear(my_map);
clear(my_list);
clear(my_queue);
...although it turns out the other nice thing about methods is automatic namespacing.
In Go you would methods for that: my_list.Clear(), my_queue.Clear() and my_map.Clear(). Now you can define a Clearer interface, which has only the Clear method. That allows you to write a function clearAndLog(item Clearer) and it will work with the list, queue and map.