Hi,
https://play.golang.com/p/uXOgD0PNc-p
I was trying to declare unicode variable name as Go supports it.
The language I used is Telugu. It's corresponding chart
(https://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0C00.pdf)
But I get the compilation issue. Am I missing anything ?
If I write Japanese variable
Thank you for the clarification.
On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 10:37 PM Axel Wagner
wrote:
> To be clear: The recommendation is *not* to compare strings. The
> recommendation is to compare errors by identity and not consider errors
> created by different packages to be equal.
>
> If you desperately
On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 4:57 AM Chris Burkert
wrote:
> I am curious: from a compiler perspective, does that mean that by using _
> simply less assembler instructions are created by not handling those
> registers which relate to _?
>
>
That kind of depends on what you mean by "not handling". Since
On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 1:58 PM Shubh Karman Singh
wrote:
> I am refactoring a JS library to Go. I have some questions but I'm not
> able to find some concrete answers for this.
> 1. What's the idiomatic way to refactor Asynchronous JS APIs to Go?
> 2. How to refactor Callbacks from JS to Golang?
Some time ago I compared Functional Reactive Programming FRP with Golang
Channels (CSP), might be useful to you as a starter:
https://rusco.github.io/
On Saturday, 5 November 2022 at 20:58:54 UTC sksin...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
> I am refactoring a JS library to Go. I have some questions
Hi,
I am refactoring a JS library to Go. I have some questions but I'm not able
to find some concrete answers for this.
1. What's the idiomatic way to refactor Asynchronous JS APIs to Go?
2. How to refactor Callbacks from JS to Golang? I have seen some Go code
which takes function as an input
To be clear: The recommendation is *not* to compare strings. The
recommendation is to compare errors by identity and not consider errors
created by different packages to be equal.
If you desperately need your error to be considered "the same" as another,
the most correct way would be to implement
The error is coming from other package. So, then have to compare strings. I
guess
On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 at 22:28, Sean Foley wrote:
> If the error is created by your code, then just reuse the same one.
>
> See
>
If the error is created by your code, then just reuse the same one.
See
https://cs.opensource.google/go/go/+/refs/tags/go1.19.3:src/io/io.go;drc=90b40c0496440fbd57538eb4ba303164ed923d93;l=44
If the error is created by code other than your own, and that code does not
reuse the same error, then
Oh I see.
What is the best way to compare errors?
Here in the above example I can do e.Error() == ErrNotFound.Error() //
which returns true
Is there any other way rather than string comparison ?
Thank you
On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 10:03 PM Axel Wagner
wrote:
> Oh and this behavior is documented,
Oh and this behavior is documented, of course: https://pkg.go.dev/errors#New
On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 5:32 PM Axel Wagner
wrote:
> Every invocation of `errors.New` returns a new unique error value, even if
> the same error text is used.
> That is intentional. It would be confusing, if package A
Every invocation of `errors.New` returns a new unique error value, even if
the same error text is used.
That is intentional. It would be confusing, if package A chose the same
error sentinel text as package B and suddenly their sentinels compare as
equal.
If you want error identity between values,
Same interface comparison
https://play.golang.com/p/9hHlTDosYzz
Why is the equals too still returning false?
Any more details on this?
Thank you
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 02:08:08PM -0700, 'Kevin Chowski' via golang-nuts wrote:
[...]
> I am on a project which primarily ships a Go command line interface (CLI),
> but we have aspirations of using the wasm compilation mode to also
> distribute a simple webapp version of it, while sharing most
I am curious: from a compiler perspective, does that mean that by using _
simply less assembler instructions are created by not handling those
registers which relate to _?
Marcel Huijkman schrieb am Sa. 5. Nov. 2022
um 09:18:
> When I explain it during my training I always say it is a trashcan
When I explain it during my training I always say it is a trashcan
variable, anything you put in is to be ignored on the spot.
On Friday, November 4, 2022 at 10:10:20 PM UTC+1 Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 04:58:35AM -0700, Canuto wrote:
>
> > I'm just starting out with
Thanks for the info. I submit a pull request to remove it.
Ian Lance Taylor 于2022年11月5日周六 06:01写道：
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 7:46 AM liiux...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> >
> > asm_amd64.s
> >
> > Please explain why 104 should be subtracted from g0 stack?
>
> Interesting question. The number 104
17 matches
Mail list logo
