Well, I imagine there's only a few types in any code where the logic would
require retrieving the "last" member of a list or array. Something like the
following could address that and be more performant than using reflection
- https://play.golang.org/p/XTbuf7RegF2.
On Sunday, June 14, 2020 at
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli wrote:
> I've been coding for a few years (first line of BASIC was in September
> 1979) and I have to admit that off-by-one errors have always been a
> problem for me. I guess I'm just that kind of sloppy.
>
>
They are surprisingly common! It has
On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 1:09:16 PM UTC-4, Jan Mercl wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 5:37 PM Jake Montgomery > wrote:
>
> > You cant really write a short 'end()' function. You have to write an end
> function for every type of slice. Or use reflection, which would make the
> function
Thank you for the feedback!
I took Jan Mercl's suggestion and wrote the short function to see if
it is useful. It is based on C Banning's suggested code. I'm going to
start using it on my projects to see if it helps.
The module is called "hind":https://github.com/TomOnTime/hind
hind.S(x)
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 5:37 PM Jake Montgomery wrote:
> You cant really write a short 'end()' function. You have to write an end
> function for every type of slice. Or use reflection, which would make the
> function slow, and not inlined. Generics anyone?
I haven't mentioned anything about
https://play.golang.org/p/EZEXmBig1y-
On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 9:37:35 AM UTC-6, Jake Montgomery wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 10:55:43 AM UTC-4, Jan Mercl wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'd suggest to just write the short 'end'
On Saturday, June 13, 2020 at 10:55:43 AM UTC-4, Jan Mercl wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli > wrote:
>
> I'd suggest to just write the short 'end' function by yourself if you
> think it's useful for you. It does not harm performance as it will get
> inlined AFAICT.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 4:42 PM Tom Limoncelli wrote:
I'd suggest to just write the short 'end' function by yourself if you
think it's useful for you. It does not harm performance as it will get
inlined AFAICT.
But it IMO hurts readability a bit. I'd prefer to read the explicit
`len(x)-1`
tl;dr: Go's "range" operator has eliminated the most common trap where
I make off-by-one errors. The next largest category of off-by-one
errors would be eliminated if there was a way to specify the last item
in an array. It would also improve a developer's ability to convey
intent.
...
I've
