Re: [go-nuts] Elphaba Chess

https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Alpha-Beta -- 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,

Re: [go-nuts] Combine low traffic website

Thanks, I'll try Caddy first. -- 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

Re: [go-nuts] Elphaba Chess

> FireFox actually uses Yahoo --- not Google --- so if Google did make a > donation to Mozilla, they got nothing in return. > You're not supposed to expect something in return when you make a donation > to a non-profit --- donations are not supposed to be a business deal. this is highly

Re: [go-nuts] Elphaba Chess

On Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:38:35 AM UTC-7, Hugh Aguilar wrote: > > > > On Monday, December 4, 2017 at 7:11:09 AM UTC-7, Gerald wrote: >> >> On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 20:07:45 -0800 (PST), you wrote: >> >> >I'll bet if Mozilla had used Go to write FireFox, rather than invent >> their >> >own

[go-nuts] Re: net/http Server Shutdown does not free up the port upon return

netstat is your friend On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 04:53:48 UTC, Albert Tedja wrote: > > net/http's Shutdown() does not free up the port upon return, or rather it > seems a bit undefined how long it takes for the port to be reusable again. > > server := { > Addr:

[go-nuts] Re: Errors with uploading large files (> 1gb) - multipart

Perhaps calling next part is consuming reader, so when you break at once you hit io.EOF, the reader you memorised has been consumed. Again, just a guess, I’ve never used the multipart package in anger. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [go-nuts] Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:43 PM, wrote: > > In addition to that I think our viewpoints on test caching are different > because our use cases of Go are different. I come upon this feature not as > someone who deals with large berths of unchanging Go packages all the time > (Go

[go-nuts] Re: Errors with uploading large files (> 1gb) - multipart

Dave, thanks for the reply! That bit is OK... you are correct that it won't break out of the loop until io.EOF. It comes across the uploadfile part first and sets the variable accordingly. Then once, looped through all parts, it breaks the loop and I try to copy the file - wherein I run into

[go-nuts] Errors with uploading large files (> 1gb) - multipart

I’ve never used the multipart reader, but looking at this piece of logic var uploadFile *multipart.Part for { p, err := fr.NextPart() if err == io.EOF { break } if err != nil { log.Fatal(err) } if err != nil {

[go-nuts] Errors with uploading large files (> 1gb) - multipart

1. *Go Version* - go version go1.6.3 linux/amd64 2. *OS* - CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) 3. *Description of Problem* - *GOAL: *Handle files (can be of any arbitrarily large size) on my server and then upload to google cloud storage. - With

Re: [go-nuts] Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

I agree on the getting the experience right for Go users piece and I think that we both see our views as in line with that theory. I think having less surprising, less gotchas and less defaults-gone-wrong behavior is better than enabling things that will get in their way and cost them

Re: [go-nuts] Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

On 8 Dec 2017, at 20:20, Russ Cox > wrote: For test caching: For the record, I’ve used 1.10beta1 for all of about ten minutes now and it’s already transformed the way I work. I can now actually run the full test suite locally as part of editing and

[go-nuts] GoLang dependency -> dep installation Issue , Burrow golang tool issues

I am not sure what is your problem exactly. Did you follow the readme and actually installed dep tool? -- 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

Re: [go-nuts] Combine low traffic website

On 8 Dec 2017, at 20:58, Gianguido Sorà > wrote: You could run the two programs on the same vps by binding them to localhost and two different ports, and then use a reverse proxy (like nginx) to multiplex connections and add HTTPS. This way you can

Re: [go-nuts] Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

I must agree that Russ made some really valid points. I would like to see some concrete examples that contradict his reasoning. -- 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,

Re: [go-nuts] Combine low traffic website

You could run the two programs on the same vps by binding them to localhost and two different ports, and then use a reverse proxy (like nginx) to multiplex connections and add HTTPS. This way you can have one machine that responds to two distinct domains, each of which will point to one of your

[go-nuts] Combine low traffic website

I have two low traffic website with different domain names(Golang web app). They are using https protocol(get certificate from let's encrypt) I want to run them in one VPS to save money. How can I run these two web apps in a single VPS? Thanks. Andrew -- You received this message because you

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

On 8 Dec 2017, at 20:07, krun...@compliahealth.com wrote: > > I also agree with this. While the feature is great I would expect base > functionality changes to be opt-in. Go 1.10 in its entirety is opt-in. There’s plenty of time and opportunity to update build systems and processes before

[go-nuts] Re: Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

I also agree with this. While the feature is great I would expect base functionality changes to be opt-in. On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 9:28:47 AM UTC-8, Aaron Lefkowitz wrote: > > There's two features that are in Go 1.10 that are opt-out new defaults. I > sincerely apologize for not being

[go-nuts] Re: [urgent] need aguments to justify use of Go for a scientific application

You are responsible for all problems related to the project after proposing a language. Caveat emptor. - Go has a backwards compatibility promise. Go didn't change it's APIs and syntax after releasing a 1.0 version of the software. - Go has formatting standards and a powerful standard library -

Re: [go-nuts] Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

First, a general point. We care very much about getting the default experience right for Go users. These features are opt-in because we believe in both cases that "on" is the right default, that developers will be more productive with these on by default than having to know to opt in. - You

[go-nuts] Re: Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

I also agree that the test caching should be opt-in. On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 10:28:47 AM UTC-7, Aaron Lefkowitz wrote: > > There's two features that are in Go 1.10 that are opt-out new defaults. I > sincerely apologize for not being active enough to spot them before now. > > > The go test

[go-nuts] Re: Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

I fully agree with Aaron. Both are fine additions but they should be opt-in instead of opt-out. "We" (and myself) have Vet in the linting stage of all of our projects. We do not want to run a static analysis in the test stage. Also, until the dependency issue is fixed for all possible scenarios

Re: [go-nuts] Is this legit in cgo -- passing []*C.SQL_ERROR_TYPE to C

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 9:24 AM, wrote: > > I am able to pass a []*C.SQL_ERROR_TYPE to C, allocate memory for > SQL_ERROR_TYPE on the "C" side, populate the structure and access it on the > Go side. It works. I tested Mac (High Sierra) and Linux 7, 64 bit. Is > this

[go-nuts] Re: Calculation of the combinations between an unlimited number of slices

When you use append, two different things can happen: 1. There is enough capacity in the original slice to which you are appending to add the additional values. You get a slice that points to the same backing memory. 2. There is not enough capacity in the original slice to which you are

[go-nuts] Re: Go 1.10 Beta 1 is released

"ResolveReference now preseves" *preserves -- 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

[go-nuts] Why so many opt-out changes to test runs in 1.10?

There's two features that are in Go 1.10 that are opt-out new defaults. I sincerely apologize for not being active enough to spot them before now. > The go test command now caches test results: if the test executable and command line match a previous run and the files and environment variables

[go-nuts] Is this legit in cgo -- passing []*C.SQL_ERROR_TYPE to C

All: I am able to pass a []*C.SQL_ERROR_TYPE to C, allocate memory for SQL_ERROR_TYPE on the "C" side, populate the structure and access it on the Go side. It works. I tested Mac (High Sierra) and Linux 7, 64 bit. Is this legitimate? Or is it just happenstance that it is working? With

[go-nuts] Re: Newbie cgo question

Ian: Thanks. mp On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 9:47:28 AM UTC-7, M.P. Ardhanareeswaran wrote: > > All: > > I am working on a pilot go/cgo project for a database driver. For one of > my C functions called by go, I chose a generic, unfortunate name > connect(). My program kept dumping

[go-nuts] Re: Go 1.10 Beta 1 is released

2017. december 8., péntek 12:51:07 UTC+1 időpontban Gabriel Aszalos a következőt írta: > > > The grammar for method expressions has been updated to relax the syntax > to allow any type expression as a receiver; this matches what the compilers > were already implementing. For example,

Re: [go-nuts] Go 1.10 Beta 1 is released

On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 3:51 AM, Gabriel Aszalos wrote: >> The grammar for method expressions has been updated to relax the syntax to >> allow any type expression as a receiver; this matches what the compilers >> were already implementing. For example,

[go-nuts] GoLang dependency -> dep installation Issue , Burrow golang tool issues

Folks, I am new to Golang, I am installing Burrow tool to fix and monitor the kafka consumer lag checking. Earlier this burrow was having "gpm" as package managment tool, Now some changes have been there in recent github repo update of this Burrow, In

[go-nuts] Go 1.10 Beta 1 is released

> The grammar for method expressions has been updated to relax the syntax to > allow any type expression as a receiver; this matches what the compilers were > already implementing. For example, struct{io.Reader}.Read is a valid, if > unusual, method expression that the compilers already