OK ...I now see the wisdom of why Go does not allow my simple
example...Thanks ALL for you help on this
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 12:46 PM Adrian Ho wrote:
> On 7/8/19 9:44 PM, lgod...@gmail.com wrote:
> > f( g() ) compiles when g returns exactly the number of args that f()
> > requires, but if g(
On 7/8/19 9:44 PM, lgod...@gmail.com wrote:
> f( g() ) compiles when g returns exactly the number of args that f()
> requires, but if g() returns only 1/2 that number f (g(), g() ) wont
> compile !! ...Is this not a Golang absurdity ??
On the contrary, it's a good example of Go's pragmatism, al
I’m not sure that is the best argument. If it was a major change most likely
the return types have changed as well, especially if new values are added, and
thus it still would not compile.
> On Aug 7, 2019, at 10:42 AM, Michel Levieux wrote:
>
> It avoids confusion AND silent errors. Imagine
It avoids confusion AND silent errors. Imagine you have:
func f() (int, int)
func g() (int, int)
func h(int, int, int, int) int
And somewhere in your code this line appears:
v = h(f(), g())
But for some reason, someday you need to change your code and now your
function f and g have the followin
On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 at 8:45:18 AM UTC-5, lgo...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> f( g() ) compiles when g returns exactly the number of args that f()
> requires, but if g() returns only 1/2 that number f (g(), g() ) wont
> compile !! ...Is this not a Golang absurdity ??
>
>>
>>
Eh. Certainly abs
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 6:45 AM wrote:
>
> f( g() ) compiles when g returns exactly the number of args that f()
> requires, but if g() returns only 1/2 that number f (g(), g() ) wont compile
> !! ...Is this not a Golang absurdity ??
No. It avoids confusion. In case you missed Adrian's reply
f( g() ) compiles when g returns exactly the number of args that f()
requires, but if g() returns only 1/2 that number f (g(), g() ) wont
compile !! ...Is this not a Golang absurdity ??
On Tuesday, August 6, 2019 at 7:26:46 PM UTC-4, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 4:14 PM
On 6/8/19 10:07 PM, lgod...@gmail.com wrote:
> Here a specific example:
>
> The following compiles and runs as expected
> m1x,m1y := ec.scalarMult(16,28,33)
> m2x,m2y := ec.scalarMult( 1,28,33)
> rx,ry := ec.add (m1x,m1y, m2x, m2y)
>
>
> However this stmt : rx,ry= ec.add(ec.scalarMult(16,28,33
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 4:14 PM wrote:
>
> ?? Am I wrong in saying that the statements I've submitted conform to "As a
> special case, if the return values..."
The special case applies to f(g()) only. It does not apply to f(g1(), g2()).
Ian
> On Monday, August 5, 2019 at 11:38:24 PM UTC-4, L
?? Am I wrong in saying that the statements I've submitted conform to "As a
special case, if the return values..."
On Monday, August 5, 2019 at 11:38:24 PM UTC-4, L Godioleskky wrote:
>
> For f1 defined as func f1(k1, k2, k3 int) (x1, x2 int) {..}
> and f2 defined as func f2(x,y int) (
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 4:07 PM wrote:
>
> Here a specific example:
>
> The following compiles and runs as expected
> m1x,m1y := ec.scalarMult(16,28,33)
> m2x,m2y := ec.scalarMult( 1,28,33)
> rx,ry := ec.add (m1x,m1y, m2x, m2y)
>
>
> However this stmt :rx,ry= ec.add(ec.scalarMult(16,28,33), ec.
Here a specific example:
The following compiles and runs as expected
m1x,m1y := ec.scalarMult(16,28,33)
m2x,m2y := ec.scalarMult( 1,28,33)
rx,ry := ec.add (m1x,m1y, m2x, m2y)
However this stmt :rx,ry= ec.add(ec.scalarMult(16,28,33),
ec.scalarMult( 1,28,33)) gives the following compiler e
12 matches
Mail list logo
