For issue tracker reports these questions are asked: What did you do?
What did you expect to see? What did you see instead? Please describe your API needs in more detail. Interfaces are useful for API design but it appears we may be misunderstanding what your interface type assertion needs are. Reflect may not be necessary. Thanks, Matt On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 4:52:53 AM UTC-6, Chris Hopkins wrote: > > Yeah, so having played with this. It seems that this is going to take some > judicious use of reflect if I'm to stand any chance of maintaining a > flexible API, which I really hoped to avoid. > I had assumed that the point of interfaces was to avoid this. I guess from > a high level I don't see why a slice of type is really that different from > a type. But I have never written a compiler so I'm sure that it's way more > complex than it seems. :-) > > Thanks for the help. > Chris > > On Thursday, 1 February 2018 00:42:04 UTC, simon place wrote: >> >> also notice, if you haven’t encountered it, this makes []interfaces a bit >> awkward to handle with ellipsis functions... >> >> https://play.golang.org/p/JWuc4jt2uSP >> >> what i do is this; >> >> https://play.golang.org/p/O9Q4K_vXlul >> >> but you will need a convert for all combinations of interfaces and >> ellipsis functions you have! >> >> from what i understand ellipsis functions are implemented simply as >> auto-magic slices, rather than expanded out, so the function doesn’t apply >> the interface wrapping like with individual parameters. >> >> -- 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.
