If runtime is a problem, then you could use a lookup table. Suppose you
have (say) 10 possible interfaces in the object: then you test those ten,
build a 10-bit binary number from the 'ok' values, and use this as an index
into 2^10 possible constructor functions.
You still need to compile thos
Although the sentence is OK as it stands, the section should be tweaked a
bit. One of the examples there (myString(0x65e5)) is valid Go but vet
rejects it, as part of the move towards disallowing this conversion, which
was there mostly for bootstrapping the libraries.
-rob
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 a
Is it easy to do?
Like I want the go app to use the windows certificate store as I don't want
to manage my own trust store. Coming from java.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emai
Yes, you are right. Mostly i'm worry about compile/run time. As i see on
my mac air m1 compilation on go 1.20 slowdown to 1-2s (i think because file
parsing)
And don't know about running time of such checks for many interface
implementations...
I'm try to check in number of interfaces in descendin
On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 7:40 PM alex-coder wrote:
> Could you please advise me the simple hosting to deploy && run a small exe
> assembled from go.
I'm using https://www.hetzner.com/cloud?country=us and Google Cloud
free tier. The later natively supports deployment of Go programs.
--
You re
Hi All !
Could you please advise me the simple hosting to deploy && run a small exe
assembled from go.
Thank you !
--
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
Ah, the spec does actually say:
>
> Converting a signed or unsigned integer value to a string type yields a
> string containing the UTF-8 representation of the integer. Values outside
> the range of valid Unicode code points are converted to "\uFFFD".
Personally, I think this is fine as is. I thi
I'm not entirely sure. I don't think your phrasing is correct, as it
doesn't represent what happens if the integer value exceeds the range of
valid codepoints (i.e. if it needs more than 32 bits to represent). That
being said, the sentence as is also isn't really precise about it. From
what I can t
I think the issue is that the *consumer* of this object checks whether
certain methods (or rather, interfaces) are present, and behaves
differently depending whether they are or not.
There are a whole load of public interfaces defined here:
https://cs.opensource.google/go/go/+/refs/tags/go1.20.5
I have some hair splitting question. In the "Conversions to and from a
string type" we read:
"Converting a signed or unsigned integer value to a string type yields a
string containing the UTF-8 representation of the integer."
Would it be more corrected to say, that conversion from integer to str
As Far as I See, you check all the combinations of methods in wideness
order.
Why not have a generic wrapper struct, that is filled with the underlying
driver.Conn's methods,
and use that if not nil, but use the generic implementation if not.
Like
```
type wrappedConn struct {
driver.Conn
q
11 matches
Mail list logo
