Hi Ian,
In my test case, I have tried, Go-->C-->Go->panic() only.
On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 3:35 AM Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 9:26 PM mariappan balraj
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kurtis Rader,
> >
> > Thanks for your response. I am working on it. I will quickly share it.
> Before t
Sorry. Forgot to share go environment.
root@soomohan:/home/soomohan/mbalraj/test_hb2# go env
GO111MODULE=""
GOARCH="amd64"
GOBIN=""
GOCACHE="/root/.cache/go-build"
GOENV="/root/.config/go/env"
GOEXE=""
GOEXPERIMENT=""
GOFLAGS=""
GOHOSTARCH="amd64"
GOHOSTOS="linux"
GOINSECURE=""
GOMODCACHE="/root/g
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 3:30 PM robert engels wrote:
> Unfortunately, I am on OSX - and Go doesn’t appear to generate a core dump
> on panic despite the GOTRACEBACK setting.
>
> That being said, the stack-traces look ok to me. See attached.
>
Since I also use macOS (aka "OS X") I investigated why
Unfortunately, I am on OSX - and Go doesn’t appear to generate a core dump on panic despite the GOTRACEBACK setting.That being said, the stack-traces look ok to me. See attached.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe fro
On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 9:26 PM mariappan balraj
wrote:
>
> Hi Kurtis Rader,
>
> Thanks for your response. I am working on it. I will quickly share it. Before
> that one more update. I have commented the below two lines. Now from the
> core, I am able to see the correct stack trace.
>
> 326 func
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 12:05 PM fliter wrote:
>
> There are many private methods with identical code in several different
> packages, which is clearly not elegant; But adding a public method that can
> be accessed by other packages (a proposal needs to be made) does not seem
> very necessary. I
If you're trying to share code among related packages within a module but
not external to the module, "internal" packages[1][2] are one common way to
accomplish that. It's a convention that's enforced by the "go" command.
This solution is used within the standard library and other official
pack
There are many private methods with identical code in several different
packages, which is clearly not elegant; But adding a public method that can
be accessed by other packages (a proposal needs to be made) does not seem
very necessary. Is there a better solution?
--
You received this message
If one is using gopls for Go support for an IDE (like vscode), with
semantic tokens enabled, the two cases are colored differently. It's
incrementally cheap, as gopls already typechecks source.
[to enable in vscode: in settings, in the gopls section,
"ui.semanticTokens": true]
I don't know that t
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 2:22 AM Nigel Tao wrote:
>
> I'd have to study mux9p for longer, but its select chooses between two
> receives, so it could possibly collapse to a single heterogenous
> channel. Indeed, both its channels are already heterogenous in some
> sense. Both its processTx and proce
This ist actually a syntactical difference. Both are syntactically just
selector expressions.
So you'd need *semantic* highlighting, which not a lot of highlighters do.
One reason is performance and another is that it means highlighting might
fail for incorrectly typed (but syntactically valid) pr
https://github.com/gaal/prolix-go/blob/master/prolix.go#L521 selects on
several channels. This was written as an exercise when I was learning the
language and may be buggy.
The application is an interactive console filter.
On Monday, April 3, 2023 at 6:44:43 AM UTC+3 Nigel Tao wrote:
> I'm wo
On Mon, Apr 03, 2023 at 10:19:49PM -0700, joseph.p...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is there an easy way to make
> this determination?
Sure, use syntax highlighting in your favor.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this gr
On Tuesday, 4 April 2023 at 07:57:58 UTC+1 Marcello H wrote:
The "scary" thing is, that if people don't have enough tests, they are
probably not aware of such a bug, or can they still be aware somehow?
Do you mean bugs due to the *old* behaviour? You're quite right, the first
they may be aware
14 matches
Mail list logo