On Mon, Apr 3, 2023 at 8:14 PM Rob Pike <r...@golang.org> wrote:
> select {
> case <-ticker.C:
> case <-pauseC:
> <-pauseC
> }
This one is more interesting. You can't combine the ticker.C and the
pauseC into a single heterogenous channel because you want to wait for
the second pause event (a resumption) without dropping or buffering
arbitrarily many other ticker events.
I take the general point that sometimes you're waiting on only a
subset of incoming events.
For this particular code, though, I think you could structure it a
different way. Instead of two channels with (ticker) events and
(pause, resume) events, you could have two channels with heterogenous
(ticker, pause) events and (resume) events. Yes, the `time.NewTicker`
API equivalent would have to be passed a channel instead of returning
a channel. The `case ' ': pauseC <- 1` code would have to alternate
which channel it sent on. But we could eliminate the select.
To be clear, it's not that the code is better / simpler / cleaner if
we eliminate selects. It's that, outside of Go, if we don't have
selects, what becomes unworkably complicated enough that it's worth
implementing selects.
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAOeFMNVZcoj8kp%3DDeaVqs55FiNcJrbPGPAUuLOLj0gUWqCRJKg%40mail.gmail.com.
