> > You don't have to, you can use a pointer indirection instead. > > I have explained why it was not sufficient upstream. I don't expect people to create two version of their types, one being for mere inclusion into maps. -- 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.
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice comparison:... Dan Kortschak
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice compar... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Dan Kortschak
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Dan Kortschak
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Dan Kortschak
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Martin Geisler
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Martin Geisler
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Matt Harden
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Martin Geisler
- Re: [go-nuts] Re: Relaxing rules on slice co... Chad