On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Val wrote: Even in OO style (e.g. java), you would not be able to write > Set s = null; > s.init( list(1,2,3) ); > > This is (more or less) the same problem with value receiver... the > "constructor-like" idiom in go is a function NewSet, not a method :
https://play.golang.org/p/_n56yMhlRt * Now* I understand the reason behind such idiom in go. Yep, everything makes sense now. Thanks a lot for the clear explanation. That really helps. Hmm... wait, map is a reference type Does that means that, this function func (s set) Has(a string) bool { _, ok := s[a]; return ok } is exactly the same as the following? func (s *set) Has(a string) bool { _, ok := (*s)[a]; return ok } I.e., even the set is super super big, there is no pass-by-value penalty in the first version? Thx -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
