You are right. But this felt clean and obvious syntax. Back to NewGate!
On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 1:47:27 PM UTC+3:30, Axel Wagner wrote:
>
> Because that wouldn't be "the zero value" anymore.
> It would require that, when you do e.g.
> x := make([]gate, 4096)
> that the compiler emits the code to initialize everything. The same
> recursively for each type that contains a gate and for each function which
> uses a local gate variable.
> So this would imply a significant hidden runtime overhead when using that
> type.
>
> The advantage of the zero type is, that it always is just zero-initialized
> memory.
>
> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 11:33 AM, dc0d <kaveh.sh...@gmail.com <javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> Why there is no field initializer in Go? Like:
>>
>> type gate struct {
>> outgoing = make(chan *sendRequest)
>> incoming = make(chan update, 10)
>> }
>>
>> Doesn't that make zero value more useful? The syntax already exists for
>> global variables so IMHO not much new would get introduced to the language
>> syntax - I can not tell of it's pros & cons for semantic or overall,
>> deeply, but seems a practical thing for making the zero value even more
>> interesting.
>>
>> --
>> 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...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
--
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.
