I would also like an easier way to construct pointers to ints/bools/strings.
Note that there is a way to write convoluted code that makes e.g.
&int{3} legal: https://play.golang.org/p/leP5_12IX0
AFAICT this isn't a backwards-compatibility concern, though.
Like you, I would really like &5 to work but I haven't thought through
the kinds of spec changes that would be required to make that possible.
-Caleb
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Nate Finch <nate.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I had missed that, thanks. The one response does not really fit the
> problem, though. There are a lot of times when POS (plain old structs) make
> a really nice UX (or would, if they weren't a pain to handle). I like
> option types like Dave said, but that's really a whole different beast that
> solves different problems.
>
> --
> 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.
--
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.
