Re: [go-nuts] Type inference inside struct literals? Pretty Please?
Thanks! Yes, let's do that :)
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 6:28:02 PM UTC-4, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:02 PM Nate Finch > wrote:
> >
> > I wish go's type inference worked inside struct literals. Filling out
> config structs would be so much easier if this worked:
> >
> > type Config struct {
> > Runtime struct {
> > Debug bool
> > }
> > }
> > c := Config{
> > Runtime: {
> > Debug: true,
> > },
> > }
> >
> > ^^ why can't this work? It seems unambiguous.
> >
> > The initial Config{ defines the type and tells the compiler exactly what
> everything inside it must be
> >
> > The reason that I wrote the struct that way is that it makes it very
> easy to read when the struct gets bigger. The sub-structs become basically
> just namespaces on the fields they encompass. But if you then have to
> write a literal by redefining the struct, the literal becomes impossible to
> read
> >
> >
> > c := Config{
> > Runtime: struct { Debug bool }{
> > Debug: true,
> > },
> > }
>
> I think you may be looking for https://golang.org/issue/21496.
>
> Ian
>
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/adaa2a60-b5e9-4e1c-b62b-2b171483f365%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [go-nuts] Type inference inside struct literals? Pretty Please?
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:02 PM Nate Finch wrote:
>
> I wish go's type inference worked inside struct literals. Filling out config
> structs would be so much easier if this worked:
>
> type Config struct {
> Runtime struct {
> Debug bool
> }
> }
> c := Config{
> Runtime: {
> Debug: true,
> },
> }
>
> ^^ why can't this work? It seems unambiguous.
>
> The initial Config{ defines the type and tells the compiler exactly what
> everything inside it must be
>
> The reason that I wrote the struct that way is that it makes it very easy to
> read when the struct gets bigger. The sub-structs become basically just
> namespaces on the fields they encompass. But if you then have to write a
> literal by redefining the struct, the literal becomes impossible to read
>
>
> c := Config{
> Runtime: struct { Debug bool }{
> Debug: true,
> },
> }
I think you may be looking for https://golang.org/issue/21496.
Ian
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/CAOyqgcWuvizjk4o%3DA6CXaQBjwMpXX4A%3DqKw_9vXkRzG%2B5zk3jA%40mail.gmail.com.
