Your point is valid, but the Go philosophy depends on you following conventions to have reliable code. This is true all over the place, e.g. you can easily ignore errors.
Other languages take a stricter approach, and maybe that's better. Not defending (although I like Go), but it's really more a language philosophy than a singular defect.
As the other commenter noted, this should fail code review and you should be using the provided constants, and it should be clear to you. And if you disagree (which again is totally valid), you should use a stricter language—there's plenty out there!
Other languages take a stricter approach, and maybe that's better. Not defending (although I like Go), but it's really more a language philosophy than a singular defect.
As the other commenter noted, this should fail code review and you should be using the provided constants, and it should be clear to you. And if you disagree (which again is totally valid), you should use a stricter language—there's plenty out there!