Not for comparison. I am just asking what is the value of a slice and what is the value of an array.
Remember that there is no slice comparison that has been spec'ed so far. On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 12:24:05 PM UTC+2, Florin Pățan wrote: > > For []T the value of a slice for the purpose of comparison would be each > individual value compared against each-other (ofc maybe comparing the > length first as an optimization). > Same goes for an array. > > And again, you are missing the whole point. Both me and you are wrong in > each-others points of view. > Just accept this. > > On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:19:48 AM UTC+1, Chad wrote: >> >> What's the value of a slice? >> >> What's the value of an array? >> >> On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 12:05:38 PM UTC+2, Florin Pățan wrote: >>> >>> If the type is *[]T then comparing memory addresses make sense to see if >>> both terms point to the same memory address. >>> If the type is []T then comparing memory addresses doesn't make sense as >>> I'd expect to compare values. >>> Finally, if the type is []*T then I'd still expect to compare values >>> (even if this is inconsistent with the above two rules), mainly because I'm >>> usually interested in the values a slice holds. >>> >>> And that's exactly why Ian and others said this is complicated to define >>> as different users expect different outcomes. >>> So rather than deal with this, in an auto-magic way, better let the >>> users deal with it as they see fit from case to case. >>> >>> On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:53:39 AM UTC+1, Chad wrote: >>>> >>>> Which is why it should be formalized. >>>> >>>> Where is the inconsistency between slices and arrays? >>>> Why do people even think that a slice need to behave like an array wrt >>>> equality, were it introduced? >>>> >>>> A slice is not an array! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:36:44 AM UTC+2, as....@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Relaxing unformalized behavior makes little sense to me. Explaining >>>>> why equality is inconsistent between slices and arrays is not something I >>>>> want to do either. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:40:19 AM UTC-7, Chad wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Rob and Robert actually wrote that this area of the spec needs more >>>>>> work... >>>>>> Otherwise, the behaviour of maps, slices and funcs cannot be fully >>>>>> explained. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:25:31 AM UTC+2, as....@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Go does not have reference types. As far as I know, the word was >>>>>>> purposefully removed from the spec to remove the ambiguity surrounding >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> word. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/golang-dev/926npffb6lA >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> @Martin >>>>>> >>>>>> As I've mentioned earlier, one ought to be careful about false >>>>>> friends from other languages. >>>>>> I am not sure I understand what you mean by: >>>>>> >>>>>> if the name field is changed after the call >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- 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.
