On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Martin Geisler wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Dan Kortschak
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 07:49 +0200, Martin
Hi Ian,
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 8:18 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Dan Kortschak
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2016-06-27 at 07:49 +0200, Martin Geisler wrote:
>>> BTW, I was about to say that you could simplify the line
Hi Henry,
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Henry wrote:
> If you were to change the code a bit as follows
> https://play.golang.org/p/VwtWRQBrEe , it will work as you expect.
>
> I think it is probably safer to instantiate a slice without specifying the
> initial
If you were to change the code a bit as follows
https://play.golang.org/p/VwtWRQBrEe , it will work as you expect.
I think it is probably safer to instantiate a slice without specifying the
initial capacity.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 12:26 AM Peter Kleiweg wrote:
> I don't know what I expected, but it's weird. Don't mess with slices.
Well, working as expected, considering slice backing array is possibly
shared wrt the result of append. (Or other slice op, b/c slices _are_
values.)
This:
https://play.golang.org/p/AE670rTMpE
I don't know what I expected, but it's weird. Don't mess with slices.
--
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