My (short) code:
https://go2goplay.golang.org/p/J4Ovyt-4xXN
The spec:
https://go.googlesource.com/proposal/+/refs/heads/master/design/go2draft-type-parameters.md
The errors:
prog.go2:7:30: interface contains type constraints (T, error)
prog.go2:19:32: interface contains type constraints (T, stru
If you can't use operations not explicitly stated in a contract: the more
reason to copy-paste a function body into a contract.
What I mean by implicit constraints is what the draft calls "implied
constraints".
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"gola
A virtual machine has its own instruction set. Go compiles to machine code
for a given target (which could be a virtual machine).
On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 12:27:49 PM UTC+2, Pablo Rozas Larraondo
wrote:
>
> The Go documentation provides some explanation about the difference
> between Go
>From the draft proposal I gather two open questions:
- How free or restricted should contract bodies be?
- How many implicit constraints can be inferred from usage?
If too much syntax is allowed in contract bodies and no implicit
constraints are gathered:
people will copy and paste function bo
[...] a copy *of* the pointed-to value.
On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 6:54:53 PM UTC+2, thwd wrote:
>
> Hi. Don't worry, I do get pointers and pass-by-value.
>
> I expected the expression (*x) to yield a copy to the pointed-to value.
>
> But, as you say, that happen
Hi. Don't worry, I do get pointers and pass-by-value.
I expected the expression (*x) to yield a copy to the pointed-to value.
But, as you say, that happens on assignment.
On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 6:50:06 PM UTC+2, Devon H. O'Dell wrote:
>
> 2018-03-28 9:39 GMT-07:00 Devon H. O'Dell >:
>
Even more surprising, make this small change to the previous playground
link code:
func (t *T) CopyExplicitDeref() *T {
x := *t
return &x
}
Merely introducing a local variable changes the behavior of the method.
On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 at 6:21:49 PM UTC+2, thwd wrote:
>
https://play.golang.org/p/pjyoPX99Zr1
Taking the address of an explicit dereference has different behavior than
implicitly dereferencing and taking address.
Is this the desired behavior? It surprised me.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts
RROR
2017/07/14 10:53:31 http2: Transport received RST_STREAM stream=1 len=4
ErrCode=INTERNAL_ERROR
2017/07/14 10:53:31 RoundTrip failure: stream error: stream ID 1;
INTERNAL_ERROR
2017/07/14 10:53:31 Post https:///: stream error: stream ID 1;
INTERNAL_ERROR
We get INTERNAL_ERROR instead of
Seems to be Mac OS related. It works on Linux, every time over HTTP 1 and 2.
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 11:33:22 AM UTC+2, thwd wrote:
>
> We tried:
>
> if len(os.Getenv("DISABLE_HTTP2")) > 0 {
> http.DefaultClient.Transport = &http.Transport{
>
trying.
If it is relevant we're using "golang.org/x/crypto/acme/autocert" for TLS
and our service is only reachable through HTTPS. The certificate is valid
and working and will not expire soon.
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 11:10:39 AM UTC+2, thwd wrote:
>
> We use GKE (Kube
We use GKE (Kubernetes on GCE) and have Go HTTP/2 pods running there. In
front of them is a service of type "LoadBalancer". As I understand, these
are nginx instances.
Since this week, the error described in issue 17066 [1] is happening about
90% of the time when we connect a client via HTTP/2
Ah, brainfart. Delete this post.
On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 1:32:09 PM UTC+2, thwd wrote:
>
> https://play.golang.org/p/mQhfM6QgQG
>
> According to this program, the float 3.0e-324 is greater than 0.0, but
> 2.0e-324 is less than 0.0
>
> I'm running into
https://play.golang.org/p/mQhfM6QgQG
According to this program, the float 3.0e-324 is greater than 0.0, but
2.0e-324 is less than 0.0
I'm running into this problem in production...
What causes this and what would be a strategy to remedy it?
--
You received this message because you are subscri
14 matches
Mail list logo
