However, that it's a valid point you raise (re strings)
But that's exactly the reason for which, someone would probably ask whether
a string is a reference type or a value type.
This could probably made clearer in the documentation.
On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 12:48:28 PM UTC+2, Chad wrote:
>
> On Friday, July 1, 2016 at 12:11:43 PM UTC+2, Martin Geisler wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:15 AM, Chad <send...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > No, it's actually fine. You are comparing values.
>> >
>> > A slice being a struct under the hood, for slices you would compare the
>> > structs (slice headers)
>>
>> Yes, when you remember that a slice is a just a small struct with a
>> pointer and some bookkeeping information (length, capacity), then you
>> can compare two slices easily. So with
>>
>> a := []int{10, 20, 30}
>> b := a[:]
>>
>> then a == b would be fast: simply compare the pointers and the
>> bookkeeping information. Direct value equality between the structs
>> gives you the expected and correct answer.
>>
>> But what about
>>
>> []int{10, 20} == []int{10, 20}
>>
>> where the two slices refer to different underlying arrays? I think you
>> argue that this comparison should be false?
>>
>
> Yes. And it is. A slice is not an array. Or an open-ended array.
>
> I would hope that slices from different underlying arrays could be
>> compared for equality based on their values, just like strings can.
>> Two strings (that are not slices from the same original string) can be
>> compared for equality just fine. I hope Go takes the shortcut when the
>> strings refer to the same memory and otherwise does the slower
>> per-byte comparison. The same could perhaps apply to slices in
>> general.
>>
>> strings are immutable. They are more akin to an array of bytes than a
> slice of bytes.
>
>> --
>> Martin Geisler
>>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
