Re: [go-nuts] Re: [rfc] build bug in type abstraction?

2023-08-16 Thread John Pritchard
Hi Brian, Thanks for the review. Your basic conclusion matches mine, that the ./main/main.go:46 and ./types.go are proven in the "go run" case, and disproven in the "go build" case. Best, John On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 9:58 AM Brian Candler wrote: > On Wednesday, 16 August 2023 at 14:05:49

[go-nuts] Re: [rfc] build bug in type abstraction?

2023-08-16 Thread Brian Candler
On Wednesday, 16 August 2023 at 14:05:49 UTC+1 John Pritchard wrote: I have a disparity between "go run" [ https://go.dev/play/p/5mr5M0luZ9k?v=goprev] and "go build" [https://github.com/syntelos/go-type-abstraction/tree/third]. Using go version 1.21.0. I don't quite understand where "go

[go-nuts] Re: [rfc] build bug in type abstraction?

2023-08-16 Thread Jason Phillips
A few things: * As illustrated by the output in your README, it appears your "make list" command is only compiling "main/main.go", rather than both "main/main.go" and "main/run.go" * There can only be one main function per main package in Go, so I'm not sure how main/run.go and main/main.go