Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-12-04 Thread T L
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 6:29:13 PM UTC+8, Dave Cheney wrote: > > There are already too many ways to declare and or assign a variable in Go. > Adding more is not a solution. how about to prefix a ~ before identifiers to avoid shadowing: func f() { a, err := 1, error.New("an

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread digg
On Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 1:23:33 AM UTC+8, Marvin Renich wrote: > > * T L [161109 11:57]: > > yes, := can be avoided totally. > > but := really has some benefits. > > > > The contradiction is the short form is 80% good with 20% bad side > effects. > > I

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread Marvin Renich
* T L [161109 11:57]: > yes, := can be avoided totally. > but := really has some benefits. > > The contradiction is the short form is 80% good with 20% bad side effects. I disagree. I saves three characters and in doing so adds much more cognitive load to distinguish

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread Marvin Renich
* T L [161109 05:18]: > On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 11:26:46 PM UTC+8, T L wrote: > > Thanks, gri, this is almost the answer I want. > > > > I still have two small questions about the short form. > > 1. would it be good to allow all identifiers in a short form are old ones

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread T L
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 8:13:36 PM UTC+8, Jan Mercl wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 1:00 PM T L > wrote: > > > many? I see only two ones. > > v := expr > var v = expr > var v T > var v T = expr > the last 3 and function/method parameters, and named return

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread Jan Mercl
On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 1:00 PM T L wrote: > many? I see only two ones. v := expr var v = expr var v T var v T = expr -- -j -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread Dave Cheney
and function/method parameters, and named return arguments. On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 23:13:36 UTC+11, Jan Mercl wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 1:00 PM T L > wrote: > > > many? I see only two ones. > > v := expr > var v = expr > var v T > var v T = expr > > -- > > -j

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread T L
On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 6:29:13 PM UTC+8, Dave Cheney wrote: > > There are already too many ways to declare and or assign a variable in Go. > Adding more is not a solution. many? I see only two ones. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread Dave Cheney
There are already too many ways to declare and or assign a variable in Go. Adding more is not a solution. -- 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] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-11-09 Thread T L
On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 11:26:46 PM UTC+8, T L wrote: > > > > On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 4:31:51 AM UTC+8, gri wrote: >> >> To answer the subject line question: No, short variable declarations are >> not technically necessary. We could have chosen not to have them. But there >> are

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-21 Thread T L
On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 4:31:51 AM UTC+8, gri wrote: > > To answer the subject line question: No, short variable declarations are > not technically necessary. We could have chosen not to have them. But there > are good reasons for them. It was a deliberate design decision. > > Let me

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-20 Thread Robert Griesemer
To answer the subject line question: No, short variable declarations are not technically necessary. We could have chosen not to have them. But there are good reasons for them. It was a deliberate design decision. Let me throw in a bit of historical perspective: Rob's invention of ":=" in one of

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-20 Thread T L
On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 3:25:18 AM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michael Jones > wrote: > > As in a number of previous questions, this one was asked poorly and the > answers dance all around the intention. I had decided

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Michael Jones
rg>, T L <tapir@gmail.com>, golang-nuts <golang-nuts@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary? var could do that too: https://play.golang.org/p/v9pQSZPTh_ (not that I'm advocating in favor of var in more places) On Wed, Oct 19, 2

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts
s@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Ian Lance Taylor < > i...@golang.org> > Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 12:25 PM > To: Michael Jones <michael.jo...@gmail.com> > Cc: T L <tapir@gmail.com>, golang-nuts <golang-nuts@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re:

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Michael Jones
ups.com> Subject: Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary? You can create multiple local variables in the for scope by writing, for example for a, b := 0, 10; a < b; a++ { (That would work with var, too). -- You received this message because you are subscribe

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michael Jones wrote: > As in a number of previous questions, this one was asked poorly and the > answers dance all around the intention. I had decided never to enter the fray > of these oddly-put assertion/half questions, but since this

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Michael Jones
As in a number of previous questions, this one was asked poorly and the answers dance all around the intention. I had decided never to enter the fray of these oddly-put assertion/half questions, but since this is lingering, may I suggest that this is his real question: “can we have var-style

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 3:24 AM, T L wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 5:43:48 AM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:50 AM, T L wrote: >> > >> > On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 10:40:02 PM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor >> >

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Jan Mercl
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:51 PM T L wrote: > but I don't want to leak i in outer block, and adding a {} pair is overkill. That's an example answering the question in the title of this thread. -- -j -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread T L
On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 6:28:21 PM UTC+8, Nyah Check wrote: > > This can still work > > *var int i = 0* > *for i < MAX {* > * //statements here* > * i++* > *}* > > Cheers! > but I don't want to leak i in outer block, and adding a {} pair is overkill. > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Nyah Check
> > > *var int i = 0* > var i int = 0 -- 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] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Nyah Check
This can still work *var int i = 0* *for i < MAX {* * //statements here* * i++* *}* Cheers! On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:24 AM, T L wrote: > > > On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 5:43:48 AM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:50 AM, T L

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread Nyah Check
> > sorry, from my experience, short form doesn't reduces the number of lines > immensely comparing to var form. > And sometimes, more code lines are needed by using short form. > > Yeah, sometimes. But we are not forced to use it though; Anyone can use any feature as they see fit. Cheers! --

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread T L
On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 5:43:48 AM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:50 AM, T L > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 10:40:02 PM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:21 AM, T L

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-19 Thread T L
On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 6:06:22 AM UTC+8, Nyah Check wrote: > > Hi TL, > > I can't talk on behalf of the creators of the language; but from my > personal experience; it makes code more succinct and easier to write; > something more or less like "doing more with less" if you know what

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread Nyah Check
Hi TL, I can't talk on behalf of the creators of the language; but from my personal experience; it makes code more succinct and easier to write; something more or less like "doing more with less" if you know what I mean. It's one the the features I love the most in Go. It just makes programming

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:50 AM, T L wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 10:40:02 PM UTC+8, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:21 AM, T L wrote: >> > >> > alternative question, why followings are not accepted in syntax: >> > >>

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread 'Axel Wagner' via golang-nuts
The reason for short variable declarations is, that it makes reuse easier in cases of multiple return values. e.g. var a, err = Foo() if err != nil { return err } var b, err = a.Bar() if err != nil { return err } doesn't work. That being said, the duplication between ways of declaring

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread T L
On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 11:01:18 PM UTC+8, Pietro Gagliardi (andlabs) wrote: > > No, the reason for short variable declarations is to avoid having to > stutter the type of variables everywhere. > You can also avoid having to stutter the type of variables by using var declaration.

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread Pietro Gagliardi
No, the reason for short variable declarations is to avoid having to stutter the type of variables everywhere. It's part of the reason why Go is strongly typed yet doesn't fully feel that way, and was one of the main design goals at first. Why the control statements require one, however, is

Re: [go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 7:21 AM, T L wrote: > > alternative question, why followings are not accepted in syntax: > > if var x = 5; x > 3 { > _ = x > } > > for var x = range []int{0,1,2} { > _ = x > > } > > switch var x = "abc"; x { >

[go-nuts] Are short variable declarations necessary?

2016-10-18 Thread T L
alternative question, why followings are not accepted in syntax: if var x = 5; x > 3 { _ = x } for var x = range []int{0,1,2} { _ = x } switch var x = "abc"; x { default: _ = x } switch var x = (interface{}(true)).(type) {