This sounds like an operation that would suit a set datatype better than slices.

This seems to have a very specific idea of "difference".
Slices aren't a set of objects, they also include ordering, and items can be duplicated.
How do you justify using this definition of difference vs others?

If this isn't going to preserve ordering, I see no reason that this shouldn't just be handled, eventually, as something like

set1 := set.New(slice1...)
diff := set1.Sub(set.New(slice2)...)
diffslice := diff.Slice()

That's not much more difficult, is more obvious about what it's doing and all the implicit allocations, and gives the caller significantly more control.

This is filter of s1 but using a set provided as a slice in s2 instead of a predicate function.

This proposal has been added to the active column of the proposals project
and will now be reviewed at the weekly proposal review meetings.
— rsc for the proposal review group

In addition to the good arguments about this really being a set operation...

For a function named Difference, I would have expected it to produce an edit script, which is essentially a sequence of insert and delete operations that converts the left argument into the right argument. But such a function is probably too complex to live in the slices package and should be a different package.

Based on the discussion above, this proposal seems like a likely decline.
— rsc for the proposal review group

除了关于这真的是一个集合操作的好的论据之外......

对于名为 的函数Difference，我希望它生成一个编辑脚本，它本质上是一系列插入和删除操作，将左参数转换为右参数。但是这样的功能可能太复杂了，不能放在slices包中，应该放在不同的包中。

This seems like a better proposal. Thanks

No change in consensus, so declined.
— rsc for the proposal review group