On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 4:59:35 PM UTC-6, matthe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I’m not sure if C has been directly mentioned. I started with C so
> iteration is just a nice shortcut to me. Assuming you’ve always had
> collection iteration available an explanation is the for loop can make the
> us
I was serious this time and the first time (years ago now) that this came
up. My motivation was not really core to the Go manifesto; in addition to
all the good Go usage model things, I also like using it to teach or show
algorithms. In this use I wanted to be able to naturally present both:
while
I’m not sure if C has been directly mentioned. I started with C so
iteration is just a nice shortcut to me. Assuming you’ve always had
collection iteration available an explanation is the for loop can make the
useful pattern of indexing into an array up to the length of the array
using an index
On Wed, 9 May 2018 11:12:48 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>Am going nuts trying to work out how to package a windows installer for
>windows10 and sign it.
>
>Microsoft are turning windows 10 basic version into a locked down system and
>so you need to make applications using their new appx format.
>
>D
On Thursday, May 10, 2018 at 4:20:41 AM UTC+10, Marc wrote:
>
> I'm still not convinced this topic is not some kind of elaborate joke.
>
It's certainly diverged from my original post, which is why I'm staying
quiet.
cheers,
Hugh Fisher
--
You received this message because you are subscribe
Just filed an issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/46214
On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 3:39:49 PM UTC-4, Wim Lewis wrote:
>
>
> On 8. maí 2018, at 8:53 f.h., jwin...@pivotal.io wrote:
> > It seems like `https://www.gitlab.com` needs to be added to the list of
> busted auth prov
I think it is more than a matter of "eager" vs "on-demand"
computation. T{} can't be constructed until its size is known.
Semantically this is a recursive definition.
However, a human may falsely assume that T{} is constructable
and given that they may think len(T{}.a) can be computed.
If on the
On 8. maí 2018, at 8:53 f.h., jwint...@pivotal.io wrote:
> It seems like `https://www.gitlab.com` needs to be added to the list of
> busted auth providers in golang/oauth2.
At the very least, has this been entered into gitlab's bug tracker? The best
outcome would obviously be for gitlab to be f
To be honest, when I look at the names on that list, I really don't see it
as much of a warning. The first entry is google. Add that to fact that the
spec basically reads "hey we know this use-case exists, we don't recommend
it, but acknowledge that some people will have valid reasons to do this
More accurately:
const size = 10
type T struct {
a [size]int
// many other fields and comments
b [size*unsafe.Sizeof(int(0))]int
}
Matt
On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 1:56:53 PM UTC-5, matthe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> type T struct {
> a [10]int
> b [len(T{}.a)]int
> }
>
> could
type T struct {
a [10]int
b [len(T{}.a)]int
}
could appear about as maintainably like this:
const size = 10
type T struct {
a [size]int
// many other fields and comments
b [size]int
}
This case doesn’t justify more complexity to me.
Matt
On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 1:00:3
I'm still not convinced this topic is not some kind of elaborate joke.
On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 1:11:04 PM UTC+2, Hugh Fisher wrote:
>
>
> Another observation from this novice Go programmer: I'm puzzled why
> there's no while statement.
>
> I know it's possible to use a for, but it doesn't feel
On 09/05/18 11:30 AM, jwint...@pivotal.io wrote:
We're innocent victims (;-)) and need to decide if we're
supporting the spec or the customers. Right now we're supporting
the spec.
I mean you've already decided to support a specific list of customers
who don't adhere to the spec.
To be clear. My intention is to make a CLI tool and put it on GitHub to make
this be easy oeady for everyone
It's nuts that this does not exist for all gophers
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
Am going nuts trying to work out how to package a windows installer for
windows10 and sign it.
Microsoft are turning windows 10 basic version into a locked down system and so
you need to make applications using their new appx format.
Does anyone have ANY tips on doing this ?
My app is a webvi
PS: Here's an example where we (humans) can obviously compute the size of a
type, yet neither cmd/compile, gccgo, nor go/types have any success in
doing so:
type T struct {
a [10]int
b [len(T{}.a)]int
}
The problem is that all implementations have an "eager" (depth-first)
approach somewhere leadi
Oh no,
nevermind: https://github.com/EvilSuperstars/go-cidrman/blob/master/subnet.go
:-(
On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 10:37:54 AM UTC-6, Augusto Roman wrote:
>
> https://godoc.org/github.com/ewbankkit/go-cidrman#Subnets
>
> On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 6:48:46 AM UTC-6, Anik Mazumder wrote:
>>
This sounds all good.
I am not disputing at all what you are saying, but a) the spec doesn't
actually state any of this explicitly; and b) I agree that size computation
is straight-forward once a type data structure is all constructed. The
caveat is the 2nd part of this sentence: We're not doing a
https://godoc.org/github.com/ewbankkit/go-cidrman#Subnets
On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 6:48:46 AM UTC-6, Anik Mazumder wrote:
>
> I would like to divide up a CIDR block into smaller subnets.
>
> For example if the CIDR block is 10.0.0.0/4, then I would like to spilt
> is up into multiple /8s.
>
> We're innocent victims (;-)) and need to decide if we're supporting the
> spec or the customers. Right now we're supporting the spec.
>
I mean you've already decided to support a specific list of customers who
don't adhere to the spec. So you're kind of already supporting both. Why
not ju
The other thing worth noting is that gitlab can be self-hosted. So I'm not
sure how it can even work under the current setup when the domain isn't
static.
On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 10:17:40 AM UTC-4, Joshua Winters wrote:
>
> Is there an expectation that all of these providers would/should
That's really a question for the oauth principals: if they say "don't do
that" and the customers don't listen, they have a problem to either fix
or add to the spec as supported.
We're innocent victims (;-)) and need to decide if we're supporting the
spec or the customers. Right now we're supp
Is there an expectation that all of these providers would/should change
their implementation? It seems like there are enough reputable
implementations that maybe the "broken" case should be better supported,
even if the spec discourages it.
I known there's been a long discussion about this alre
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:51 PM, wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 10:15:08 PM UTC+2, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, wrote:
>> >
>> > I looked at the source but can't understand it well enough.
>> >
>> > If I allocate a [1000]byte, or a []byte, I understand th
On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 10:15:08 PM UTC+2, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:00 PM, > wrote:
> >
> > I looked at the source but can't understand it well enough.
> >
> > If I allocate a [1000]byte, or a []byte, I understand the GC will need
> to
> > mark the slice/arra
I would like to divide up a CIDR block into smaller subnets.
For example if the CIDR block is 10.0.0.0/4, then I would like to spilt is
up into multiple /8s.
This needs to be similar to subnet method of netaddr module in Python
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Go
On Tuesday, May 8, 2018 at 12:22:39 PM UTC-4, Joshua Winters wrote:
>
> It seems like `https://www.gitlab.com` needs to be added to the list of
> busted auth providers in golang/oauth2.
>
> Instead of maintaining a list of these providers, can we just send the
> `client_id` and `client_secret`
Can you not convert it to an unsafe.Pointer and check for that being nil?
On Tuesday, 8 May 2018 16:49:23 UTC+3, Michael Cohen wrote:
>
> In my case, being a new go learner the following bit of code stumped me. I
> am receiving a interface{} value and I am trying to figure out the best way
> to
Robert Griesemer wrote in
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/25305#issuecomment-387624488 at May 9th:
I'm probably using incorrect assumptions. Let me summarize them here:
1) A type is cyclical iff its size is not computable.
I'm really not sure if this is what the specification really means.
29 matches
Mail list logo
