thanks for the interest, a Done method would be what i was thinking of by
the type/object way to do it, rather than the closure way of
handing-back/defering a func.
but its the isolation i'm thinking about, without some way to get the
garbage collector to call code,( like in the original post u
I assume you know where your interface{} will no longer be used. Why not
put in an explicit optimization structure delete there? There's already a
New, make a Done or something like that.
Matt
On Sunday, January 21, 2018 at 6:41:00 PM UTC-6, simon place wrote:
>
> after a bit of thought, its no
after a bit of thought, its not ideal.
it would work, but defeats part of the objective, which was for the
optimisations to be transparent, having the defer, or callbacks, in the
calling function breaks the isolation.
i could insert callbacks in the base code which would just be redundant
when
that might do it, the closures are actually being made by a New(type) call,
and i was basically fixated by returning only the new instance (and maybe a
error), but no reason not to return a callback destructor.
maybe New isn't the right name anymore?
the idea is to incrementally add a registry
Have the closure generator return the resource?
https://play.golang.org/p/16pyo0gh8_s
I'm not sure what you mean by using types instead, or even why you are
trying to do this. Can you explain more?
Matt
On Sunday, January 21, 2018 at 3:17:20 PM UTC-6, simon place wrote:
>
> i wrote the code be
