On Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 9:09:34 PM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:37 PM, T L <tapi...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 1:28:03 PM UTC+8, T L wrote: > >> > >> Looks this question can be stated as "why can't named pointer types > have > >> methods?" > > > > > > Just found this thread > > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/Vhh5XOm96YI > > to answer "why can't named pointer types have methods?" > > > > But I think the two questions are not totally equivalent: > > 1. Why a **T value can't call methods of *T? > > 2. Why can't named pointer types have methods? > > Your second question has been answered. > > The first question is, essentially, what is the method set of **T? > The answer is: **T has no methods. Why should it? > > T has methods (or at least may have methods): the methods whose > receiver is type T. *T has methods: the methods whose receiver is > type *T. For convenience, the methods of T are added to the method > set of *T. > > **T does not have methods. There is no reason to add the methods of > *T to the method set of **T, because the method set of **T is empty. >
ok, we know golang doesn't lack minor/exception rules. > > Ian > -- 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.
