Nuno, can you say more about the constraints here? It seems you could you
accomplish your goal of creating an AggregateFunction out of an
iter.Seq processor
function by storing all of the results in a slice as Step is called, then
running your processor function on the slice of values (
slices.Valu
Maybe confusingly, that's the expected output:
https://github.com/rsc/quote/blob/master/quote_test.go :)
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 5:49 PM Alexey Melezhik wrote:
> Thanks. I receive " Don't communicate by sharing memory, share memory by
> communicating. " error (?) when run the example
>
> пятница
Picking the first decimal library on pkg.go.dev, what about
https://play.golang.org/p/Co96HKlvSMp ?
On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 7:34 PM Kurtis Rader wrote:
> You've fallen into a common trap. Base 2 floating point values cannot
> represent most decimal values precisely. This is why you should never,
https://play.golang.org/p/LNP6SK1J02V
var b64 [64]byte // 64 zero bytes
var x = make([]byte, 64)
fmt.Println(bytes.Equal(b64[:], x))
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 7:32 PM Gert wrote:
> Is it possible to write this without creating a separate var b64 first?
> Basically just write it in one line?
>
> v
This proposal is not very much different from a one-liner
if err != nil { }
It's just 10 more characters. Granted, gofmt won't leave the one-liner
formatted that way, but it's not much more typing and comes with the
benefit of not needing a new keyword.
One variation on this proposal that is a
Even though you can get at the values by iterating, I can't seem to do so
with a direct reference to the NaN key:
https://play.golang.org/p/69m-LK7obHA
On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 4:18 PM Burak Serdar wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 4:59 PM Dan Kortschak
> wrote:
> >
> > They are not inaccessible,
