It allows to return the value pointed at (*Element) but I still don't have
access to the *Element field adddress of let's say var d Div so can't
change d.Element to swap it with another value. (by taking Ref(,e) where
e is some *Element)
It's usable as a constraint but that's not sufficient.
How does `interface{ AsElement() *Element }` not do exactly what you want?
On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 4:14 AM atd...@gmail.com wrote:
> Might have come across this today as I was trying to simplify some code.
>
> Basically, I have a base type called *Element that has a method
> AsElement() *Element
Ah, I forgot to use reflection for instance... That might be doable.
On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 4:13:35 AM UTC+2 atd...@gmail.com wrote:
> Might have come across this today as I was trying to simplify some code.
>
> Basically, I have a base type called *Element that has a method
>
Might have come across this today as I was trying to simplify some code.
Basically, I have a base type called *Element that has a method AsElement()
*Element that returns itself.
And this base element is used as a base for many others, for isntance:
type Div struct{ *Element}
type Span
While this would make some things much easier for me, it seems this would
be a pretty fundamental change. Constraints are essentially interfaces and
interfaces in Go are defined by behaviors. Structs, on the other hand, are
defined by properties. There is no behavior that all structs have that
Same here @Abraham,
ResponseType interface {
~struct{}
}
Obviously this doesn't work, I would love to see it working though.
On Wednesday 14 September 2022 at 17:48:19 UTC+3 Abraham wrote:
> I am glad I found this thread because I was just now breaking my head
> figuring out
I am glad I found this thread because I was just now breaking my head
figuring out why my was not working
On Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 10:41:29 PM UTC-4 Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 7:36 PM Jeremy Kassis wrote:
> >
> > Where exactly did this land? Seems like an
On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 7:36 PM Jeremy Kassis wrote:
>
> Where exactly did this land? Seems like an important conversation...
To date there is no way to write a constraint that requires that a
type argument be a struct type.
> ```
> // RPCHandler passes RPCReq and RPCRes as fn args
> func
Where exactly did this land? Seems like an important conversation...
```
// RPCHandler passes RPCReq and RPCRes as fn args
func RPCHandler[T RPCReq, S RPCRes](fn func(T, S)) http.HandlerFunc {
return func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
req := T{}
if err :=
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 4:57 PM Pee Jai wrote:
>
> Just to clarify: This is not directly related to generics. It is related to
> interfaces (and the type constraints feature) which are incidental to
> generics and provides extra power to developers. In this particular use case,
> it provides a
But if you interpret the method as ‘format this struct’ a struct has named
fields. A primitive has no named fields so the output is empty.
It is almost always easier to define the contract if the method in an
unbreakable way than rely on the compiler to catch all problems.
For example what
Just to clarify: This is not directly related to generics. It is related to
interfaces (and the type constraints feature) which are incidental to
generics and provides extra power to developers. In this particular use
case, it provides a useful compile-time check for an argument that is
I disagree. A type constraint for a struct would definitely provide
compile-time guarantee that only a struct can be used.
On Thursday, June 25, 2020 at 8:18:13 AM UTC+10, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:22 PM David Finkel > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:34
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:22 PM David Finkel wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:34 AM Robert Engels wrote:
>>
>> Generics will not solve this fully anyway - you’ll still need reflection.
>> Why not just return empty if the user doesn’t pass a struct?
>>
> That sounds like a bug waiting to
Generics will not solve this fully anyway - you’ll still need reflection. Why
not just return empty if the user doesn’t pass a struct?
> On Jun 24, 2020, at 8:29 AM, Pee Jai wrote:
>
>
> Here is my use case:
> https://godoc.org/github.com/rocketlaunchr/react#UnmarshalState
>
> That
Here is my use case:
https://godoc.org/github.com/rocketlaunchr/react#UnmarshalState
That function has an argument that accepts only a struct. I use the reflect
package to iterate over the structs fields (and also to check if it
actually is a struct). The function has notapplicability for
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 7:08 PM Pee Jai wrote:
>
> I can't find a way to constrain for just structs. I don't want primitives.
The design draft doesn't provide any mechanism for a type constraint
to match any arbitrary struct type, and not any other kind of type.
But it's not clear why that
I can't find a way to constrain for just structs. I don't want primitives.
--
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
18 matches
Mail list logo
