Hi there,
I wondering why there is no pure XML Schema validation library in go or
even in the go std.
Is there any best practice to validate xml schemas in go?
Cheers,
Sandro
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from
Thanks Ravi, i tried this one but programs covered in course are missing in
this git.
On Sun, 10 Oct, 2021, 6:43 am Ravi Teja, wrote:
> Github repo for Todd's web dev course:
> https://github.com/GoesToEleven/golang-web-dev
>
> On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 6:23 PM Akshay Dalvi wrote:
>
>> Where i can
hey @Raphael,
did you ever find how to resolve this issue? I have a similar problem where
I can compile on mac but not linux
On Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 6:01:55 AM UTC+2 raphae...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry to revive an age old thread, but I'm encountering this error and it
> seems my
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 2:36 AM peter.m...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> I'm curious, was any consideration given to hiding generics behind a flag in
> 1.18? The idea being it's such a complex feature that one could imagine a
> backwards incompatible change being desirable if some weird issue is found.
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 12:59 AM nil...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I totally understand that nothing is guaranteed. Just wondering what is Go
> team's release policy regarding the deadline. Is that a hard deadline? I
> guess the generics support is the biggest component in 1.18 (and also the one
> ma
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 2:30 PM 'Jeff Winkler' via golang-nuts
wrote:
>
> I optimized this file, by unrolling small loops and removing unnecessary
> branches. What's the next step to get it in the process for eventual
> inclusion ? It's about 30% faster.
>
> src/crypto/elliptic/p224.go
For th
Hi All,
I optimized this file, by unrolling small loops and removing unnecessary
branches. What's the next step to get it in the process for eventual
inclusion ? It's about 30% faster.
src/crypto/elliptic/p224.go
Thanks,
Jeff
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G
Thanks for the responses, Sean and Ian!
I've been using the suffix "_test" to limit what can be tested (only the
public methods) in order to think more about the design of the package
itself, but I was always curious to know a little bit more about what's
behind the difference between each choice,
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 5:48 AM Steven Hartland
wrote:
> If the ast.Files passed to ast.NewPackage includes built in types such as
> int it returns an error e.g.
> file1.go:5:6: undeclared name: int
>
> Is there a way to prevent that?
>
Generally, I always add the `builtin` package to the list o
If the ast.Files passed to ast.NewPackage includes built in types such as
int it returns an error e.g.
file1.go:5:6: undeclared name: int
Is there a way to prevent that?
Playground example: https://play.golang.org/p/Yg30TTzoLHP
My goal is to take multiple files, resolve inter file dependencies e
I'm curious, was any consideration given to hiding generics behind a flag
in 1.18? The idea being it's such a complex feature that one could imagine
a backwards incompatible change being desirable if some weird issue is
found.
On Monday, October 11, 2021 at 5:26:35 PM UTC+13 Ian Lance Taylor w
Hi Ian, thanks for the reply.
I totally understand that nothing is guaranteed. Just wondering what is Go
team's release policy regarding the deadline. Is that a hard deadline? I
guess the generics support is the biggest component in 1.18 (and also the
one many people have been waiting for long
12 matches
Mail list logo
