Another possible course of action is to have all the logic of generating these
lines embedded inside a 'go generate' program.
That's what has been done in go-python/gopy for example.
-s
Original Message
On Aug 10, 2020, 06:18, wrote:
> On Sunday, August 9, 2020 at 9:56:43 AM
On Sunday, August 9, 2020 at 9:56:43 AM UTC-7, Miki Tebeka wrote:
>
> Is there a way to pass include path dynamically to cgo?
>
The easiest way is to generate the include file and just reference it from
cgo. It looks like your code needs to have a Makefile anyway.
--
You received this message b
Thanks. I agree that running arbitrary code in #cgo directives is a bad
idea :)
I'll probably document asking to
export CGO_CFLAGS="-I $(python -c 'import numpy;
print(numpy.get_include())')"
before running "go get"
On Monday, August 10, 2020 at 4:06:54 AM UTC+3, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 4:33 PM Patrick Smith wrote:
>
> I like the second draft for generics. It seems to me a large
> simplification and improvement over the first draft. Considering just
> the state of Go today, I would be quite happy with this, even if it's
> not perfect. Thanks to Ian, Robert,
On Sat, Aug 8, 2020 at 7:51 PM wrote:
>
> Add support of optional syntax_version to file beginning, allow compiler to
> tokenize/compile file by the compiler of syntax_version, using any number of
> syntax_version-s in same project
>
> Why? Because go takes ridiculously long to implement generic
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 9:57 AM Miki Tebeka wrote:
>
> Is there a way to pass include path dynamically to cgo?
>
> I'm working with numpy and the way to find the include directory is to call
> (in Python)
> numpy.get_include()
>
> In a Makefile I can run go build with
> CGO_CFLAGS=-I $(shell pytho
What problems would you expect generics to bring in terms of syntax, where
such flexibility would be a solution?
On Sunday, August 9, 2020 at 4:51:40 AM UTC+2 ivaniva...@gmail.com wrote:
> Add support of optional syntax_version to file beginning, allow compiler
> to tokenize/compile file by the
There's a big difference between creating arbitrary operators like c++, and
just allowing the predefined set of operators to be implemented for custom
types only. The later, combined with the overall aversion of the Go
community towards operator overloading as a whole, will probably lead to
ver
Is there a way to pass include path dynamically to cgo?
I'm working with numpy and the way to find the include directory is to call
(in Python)
numpy.get_include()
In a Makefile I can run go build with
CGO_CFLAGS=-I $(shell python -c 'import numpy; print(numpy.get_include())')
go build
but
On second thought, that would lead to ‘operator overloading’ and the abuses it
invites - so oh well - I guess we write duplicate methods based on types -
which is pretty much what you can do now - write a base implementation using
interface{} and then a small wrapper struct that types it. Given
Thank you Kurtis. It was a great help. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Kurtis RaderSent: 03 August 2020 10:40To: Anjana PrabhakarCc: golang-nutsSubject: Re: [go-nuts] golan operator On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 9:56 PM Anjana Prabhakar wrote:Dear All, Can someone help me
> I had the same situation and this worked perfectly:
>
> replace mylib => ../mylib
>
> If it doesn't - check paths, name of the "mylib" module, etc
Thanks. It worked. I strongly feel like I tried the same yesterday and
it didn't work, but probably mis-typed the name in the module.
--
You receiv
I had the same situation and this worked perfectly:
replace mylib => ../mylib
If it doesn't - check paths, name of the "mylib" module, etc
суббота, 8 августа 2020 г. в 21:20:56 UTC+3, Sankar:
> Hi
>
> I have a monolithic source repository that is NOT in git, mercurial etc.
>
> The directory
13 matches
Mail list logo