I believe the indices in your examples are updated in the wrong place. The
following seems to do what I believe you expect:
https://go.dev/play/p/U2YQM3fOz98
Pascal
On 16 Aug 2024, at 00:08, 'Dan Kortschak' via golang-nuts
wrote:
Currently the Gonum graph packages make use of go:linkname abu
Currently the Gonum graph packages make use of go:linkname abuse to be
able to implement first class iterator values that can be passed. We
also have a reflect-based implementation, but this incurs a significant
performance cost and so cannot be used as the default implementation
(users are able to
On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 2:26 PM 'Peter Hynes' via golang-nuts
wrote:
>
> Thanks.
>
> https://github.com/golang/go/issues/68903
Thanks for reporting this.
Ian
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and st
Thanks.
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/68903
Peter
On Thursday 15 August 2024 at 18:17:53 UTC+1 Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 9:59 AM 'Peter Hynes' via golang-nuts
> wrote:
> >
> > We have some code that works fine in Go 1.22, but throws a compiler
> error in Go 1.23.
Ian,
Gemini and ChatGPT are always good for a laugh. I gave Gemini a prompt of
"Is this true?" followed by the text of the article.
The Gemini results summary:
Overall Assessment
The information you presented aligns with credible news reports and public
discussions about these events. The de
That is a high bar!
rsc, thanks for the great leadership and clarity over the past decade+!
And best of luck to Austin...
On Thursday 15 August 2024 at 18:14:44 UTC+1 Russ Cox wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There is no need for this discussion to get heated.
> There is also no turmoil, as we've already es
On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 9:59 AM 'Peter Hynes' via golang-nuts
wrote:
>
> We have some code that works fine in Go 1.22, but throws a compiler error in
> Go 1.23.
...
> Is this a compiler bug?
Yes.
Would you be able to file an issue at https://go.dev/issue? Thanks.
Ian
--
You received this
Hi all,
There is no need for this discussion to get heated.
There is also no turmoil, as we've already established.
For those who can't see the article due to the Medium paywall,
there is a copy here: https://archive.ph/BQj5j.
It reads like ChatGPT summarized the sources at the end.
If nothing el
Amnon,
The final two sentences should allow you to piece together the entire
article:
"Russ Cox has managed Google’s Go language for over 12 years and worked at
the company for more than 18 years. He is one of the original members of
the Go language team."
You are spreading misinformation cli
Hi community,
We have some code that works fine in Go 1.22, but throws a compiler error
in Go 1.23.
We've recreated the issue with a simple example:
```
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
type A = []string
func m[T ~A](a T) {
fmt.Println(a[0])
}
func main() {
b := []string{"value"}
m[A](b)
}
``
Too often stories in the press describe "Google" as a single entity and all
its actions as part of a unified (and usually diabolical) plan. I think
many readers would be reassured if they could only see, as we do from the
inside, the degree to which Google is an immense and chaotic collection of
Thanks, Ian for putting our minds to rest.
On Thursday 15 August 2024 at 17:11:41 UTC+1 Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 1:10 AM 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts
wrote:
>
> The facts of the title are correct. See here:
>
https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/01/google-lays-off-staff-fr
On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 1:10 AM 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts
wrote:
>
> The facts of the title are correct. See here:
> https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/01/google-lays-off-staff-from-flutter-dart-python-weeks-before-its-developer-conference/
> https://groups.google.com/g/golang-dev/c/0OqBkS2RzWw
>
The facts of the title are correct. See here:
https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/01/google-lays-off-staff-from-flutter-dart-python-weeks-before-its-developer-conference/
https://groups.google.com/g/golang-dev/c/0OqBkS2RzWw
However, mentioning these in the same sentences seems to drum up a storm in
a wa
I guess you are right.
Thank you very much for the discussion!
On Wednesday 14 August 2024 at 20:21:01 UTC+3 robert engels wrote:
> My understanding is that optimizations like this are almost never worth it
> on modern processors - the increased code size works against the modern
> branch predi
15 matches
Mail list logo
