On 15 February 2017 at 13:48, wrote:
>>
>> > Side-note: I don't think goimports can actually do what you are saying,
>> > can it? Because, if you run goimports on a valid program, it won't actually
>> > *change* any imports, it might just reformat it. For goimports to change
>> > anything semanti
>
>
> > Side-note: I don't think goimports can actually do what you are saying,
> can it? Because, if you run goimports on a valid program, it won't actually
> *change* any imports, it might just reformat it. For goimports to change
> anything semantically, the program would need to have missin
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 5:07 PM Axel Wagner
wrote:
> What about a) vs. c)?
c) is fine, but as it's a matter of personal taste, ie. it's IMO more or
less bike shedding. IOW, whatever choice as long as it's a single one.
Actually, the split goimports bring to the one-true-gofmt-style is another,
a
Which is a strong opinion against b). What about a) vs. c)?
Side-note: I don't think goimports can actually do what you are saying, can
it? Because, if you run goimports on a valid program, it won't actually
*change* any imports, it might just reformat it. For goimports to change
anything semantic
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 4:30 PM 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts <
golang-nuts@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> Am I alone in being bothered by this? ^^
My personal opinion is that a tool that can, even potentially, turn a valid
program into an invalid one, or worse, silently into another valid program
wi
