On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 9:27:36 PM UTC+3, Konstantin Khomoutov
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
> parais...@gmail.com <javascript:> wrote:
>
> > Obviously in Go this is a compile time error :
> >
> > type Foo interface {}
> >
> >
> > func (f Foo) DoSomething(){}
> >
> I wonder if there is some technical limitations that make it
> > undesirable or hard to implement, or it's just that Go designers
> > didn't think it is a relevant feature.
> >
> > I personally think there is it could be handy in some situations,
> > instead of having to write a function without receiver, it could
> > allow to attach behavior to interfaces automatically
> > instead of the explicit :
> >
> > func DoSomething(f Foo){}
> >
> >
> > what is your opinion on the matter ? Unfortunately I wasn't able to
> > catch anyone of the Go team during the recent conference in Paris to
> > ask that question.
>
> type Foo interface {
> func DoSomething()
> }
>
> func (f Foo) DoSomething() {
> }
>
> var f Foo
>
> f.DoSomething()
>
> How do you propose to distinguish these two DoSomething()-s?
>
That's just a default method implementation. There's nothing inherently
confusing about what gets called. If a concrete implementation exists, that
gets called, otherwise the default one does.
>
> More to the point: how could anyone infer what's about to get called
> from looking at that "f.DoSomething()" expression even if there could
> be no conflict as in my contrived example -- is it a call on an
> "interface itself" or on a concrete type an interface value contains?
>
--
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.
