To your direct questions, the answer is a mix of both: C++ style where the
generic block is a template and code is essentially generated for each type
known at compile time with static dispatch, and java-like where it is
similar to an interface call with dynamic dispatch. The compiler will
Than,
Appreciate you saying that. And you're very welcome.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 8:29 PM Than McIntosh wrote:
> Thank you @Ugorji Nwoke , I appreciate your going
> the extra mile to include gollvm in your testing.
>
> Cheers, Than
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 11:17 A
Ugorji here - author of the github.com/ugorji/go/codec
<https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/ugorji/go/codec> package.
The notes below are for folks that are interested in why we use unsafe, and
how we mitigate concerns around it.
As Peter mentioned above, you can pass the build tag "
A simple message was posted: "Black Lives Matter. Support the Equal Justice
Initiative".
I understand that this is controversial to say in some quarters. I am
saddened that this is controversial to say here.
Rust developers succinctly captured why it is appropo to say in
This came up about 5 or so years ago.
Brad proposed it, it was deliberated for a while, and Russ articulated why
it was no doable at the time. There may be a chance to resurrect it, but it
will be good to see what was written before.
See
Prior discussion:
to measure cost as an awareness metric, but seldom run that way.
> Go is safe until you do that, then it becomes unsafe. Too risky for serious
> use.
>
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 4:53 AM Ugorji Nwoke > wrote:
>
>> I know this is an old thread, but is -B still supported?
>>
>&
I know this is an old thread, but is -B still supported?
On Monday, August 27, 2012 at 2:09:19 AM UTC-4, minux wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, August 27, 2012, bluehorn wrote:
>>
>> Is "-gcflags -B" still supported in go1.0.2? I suppose it was gone
>> already.
>>
> It is still there.
>
--
You
FYI I recently posted a proposal for some unambiguous syntax which would
give a lot of the value of ternary operators i.e. write the 5 line if-else
block in the FAQ as a 1-liner, without the drawbacks, while IMO preserving
the simplicity of the go language in approachability, readability and
me that it is not going to be an issue for
>> your program’s performance.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2018, at 8:45 AM, Ugorji Nwoke wrote:
>>
>> Thanks so much Silviu. I love this tool - I had seen it before, but
>> didn't realize it also supported
1.4, 1.7, 1.9, 1.11, tip, etc)
> and/or gccgo, take a look at variations, etc
>
> On Saturday, 24 November 2018 11:07:51 UTC-5, Jan Mercl wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 4:31 PM Ugorji Nwoke wrote:
>>
>> > Jan, you and I have the same understanding i.e. floa
ay, November 24, 2018 at 10:25:58 AM UTC-5, Jan Mercl wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 4:02 PM Ugorji Nwoke > wrote:
>
> > I understand the rules from the context of the language and what the
> compiler will accept - conversion MUST be explicit. I am asking if there is
>
... }
Is there a runtime cost to that uint(len(b)), or no?
On Saturday, November 24, 2018 at 9:57:06 AM UTC-5, Jan Mercl wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 3:43 PM Ugorji Nwoke > wrote:
>
> Here is the authoritative <https://golang.org/ref/spec#Conversions>
> answer:
>
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Ugorji Nwoke <ugo...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > This is not so much about de-virtualization. It's about not making a
> call to
> > an empty function i.e. I expect that interface calls come down to
> > 1. derefere
ec 1, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Michael Banzon <mich...@banzon.dk> wrote:
> I don’t have specific knowledge about how this works - but wouldn’t it be
> fairly easy to test by having the compiler emit the assembly code?
>
> --
> Michael Banzon
> https://michaelbanzon.com/
>
>
&
:
for {
v.ReadMapElem()
...
v.ReadMapEnd()
...
}
On Friday, December 1, 2017 at 10:18:38 AM UTC-5, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 2:40 AM, Ugorji Nwoke <ugo...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> >
> > I know that a no-op function call is optim
I know that a no-op function call is optimized away, as it is inlined to
nothing.
However, what about a no-op interface call?
See sample code:
type I interface { Do(int) }
type T1 struct{}
func (_ T1) Do(i int) {}
func main() {
var v I
v = T1{}
v.Do(1)
}
Is it safe to assume the following
never mind - I figured it out.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 6:08:27 PM UTC-4, Ugorji Nwoke wrote:
>
> I currently use command line parameters to test that various options work
> fine.
>
> For example, I define some test flags like -tv -ta -ti ... that set
> different
I currently use command line parameters to test that various options work
fine.
For example, I define some test flags like -tv -ta -ti ... that set
different options on my test, and then run my tests.
The execution looks like this:
go test -tv
go test -ti
go test -ta
...
Unfortunately, I
a different decoder. Try package: github.com/ugorji/go
( https://godoc.org/github.com/ugorji/go/codec ).
On Monday, November 7, 2016 at 5:49:45 PM UTC-5, Gokul Muthuswamy wrote:
>
> I have created a mock with a test file the code attached
> jsoncodegolang.txt, attached is also a
Show some code, and we may be able to advise you better.
On Monday, November 7, 2016 at 1:26:49 PM UTC-5, gmuth...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> We are using Go for one of our projects and our API's use JSON as the
> payload formatter. We have a large json file (12MB) that needs to be
> unmarshalled.
https://godoc.org/github.com/ugorji/go/codec
https://github.com/ugorji/go
package name: github.com/ugorji/go/codec
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 5:30:10 AM UTC-4, dc0d wrote:
>
> Is there a JSON package that have these characteristics?
>
>
>- can marshal numeric integer va
21 matches
Mail list logo
