On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 1:51 PM Torsten Bronger < bron...@physik.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> There still is a subtle asymmetry: a.b() is implicitly converted to (&a).b() if necessary. Why isn't f(v) implicitly converted to f(&v) if necessary? Go does not do implicit conversions of types of run time values. With the sole exception when assigning a thing to a (assignment compatible) interface. Adding another magical conversion _of the value going to be wrapped in the interface_ from T to &T equals doubling the implicit-conversion-department surface. I cannot and do not speak for the language designers, so that's about all I can say. -- -j -- 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 https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
