mirror of
				https://github.com/golang/go.git
				synced 2025-10-31 08:40:55 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	 8a092b74fc
			
		
	
	
		8a092b74fc
		
	
	
	
	
		
			
			Change-Id: I3bfe1b11265f0def4701faf2cfc1ad10a666a473 Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/79596 Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
		
			
				
	
	
		
			3664 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			114 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			HTML
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			3664 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			114 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			HTML
		
	
	
	
	
	
| <!--{
 | ||
| 	"Title": "Effective Go",
 | ||
| 	"Template": true
 | ||
| }-->
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="introduction">Introduction</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go is a new language.  Although it borrows ideas from
 | ||
| existing languages,
 | ||
| it has unusual properties that make effective Go programs
 | ||
| different in character from programs written in its relatives.
 | ||
| A straightforward translation of a C++ or Java program into Go
 | ||
| is unlikely to produce a satisfactory result—Java programs
 | ||
| are written in Java, not Go.
 | ||
| On the other hand, thinking about the problem from a Go
 | ||
| perspective could produce a successful but quite different
 | ||
| program.
 | ||
| In other words,
 | ||
| to write Go well, it's important to understand its properties
 | ||
| and idioms.
 | ||
| It's also important to know the established conventions for
 | ||
| programming in Go, such as naming, formatting, program
 | ||
| construction, and so on, so that programs you write
 | ||
| will be easy for other Go programmers to understand.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This document gives tips for writing clear, idiomatic Go code.
 | ||
| It augments the <a href="/ref/spec">language specification</a>,
 | ||
| the <a href="//tour.golang.org/">Tour of Go</a>,
 | ||
| and <a href="/doc/code.html">How to Write Go Code</a>,
 | ||
| all of which you
 | ||
| should read first.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="examples">Examples</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The <a href="/src/">Go package sources</a>
 | ||
| are intended to serve not
 | ||
| only as the core library but also as examples of how to
 | ||
| use the language.
 | ||
| Moreover, many of the packages contain working, self-contained
 | ||
| executable examples you can run directly from the
 | ||
| <a href="//golang.org">golang.org</a> web site, such as
 | ||
| <a href="//golang.org/pkg/strings/#example_Map">this one</a> (if
 | ||
| necessary, click on the word "Example" to open it up).
 | ||
| If you have a question about how to approach a problem or how something
 | ||
| might be implemented, the documentation, code and examples in the
 | ||
| library can provide answers, ideas and
 | ||
| background.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="formatting">Formatting</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Formatting issues are the most contentious
 | ||
| but the least consequential.
 | ||
| People can adapt to different formatting styles
 | ||
| but it's better if they don't have to, and
 | ||
| less time is devoted to the topic
 | ||
| if everyone adheres to the same style.
 | ||
| The problem is how to approach this Utopia without a long
 | ||
| prescriptive style guide.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| With Go we take an unusual
 | ||
| approach and let the machine
 | ||
| take care of most formatting issues.
 | ||
| The <code>gofmt</code> program
 | ||
| (also available as <code>go fmt</code>, which
 | ||
| operates at the package level rather than source file level)
 | ||
| reads a Go program
 | ||
| and emits the source in a standard style of indentation
 | ||
| and vertical alignment, retaining and if necessary
 | ||
| reformatting comments.
 | ||
| If you want to know how to handle some new layout
 | ||
| situation, run <code>gofmt</code>; if the answer doesn't
 | ||
| seem right, rearrange your program (or file a bug about <code>gofmt</code>),
 | ||
| don't work around it.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| As an example, there's no need to spend time lining up
 | ||
| the comments on the fields of a structure.
 | ||
| <code>Gofmt</code> will do that for you.  Given the
 | ||
| declaration
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type T struct {
 | ||
|     name string // name of the object
 | ||
|     value int // its value
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>gofmt</code> will line up the columns:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type T struct {
 | ||
|     name    string // name of the object
 | ||
|     value   int    // its value
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| All Go code in the standard packages has been formatted with <code>gofmt</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Some formatting details remain.  Very briefly:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <dl>
 | ||
|     <dt>Indentation</dt>
 | ||
|     <dd>We use tabs for indentation and <code>gofmt</code> emits them by default.
 | ||
|     Use spaces only if you must.
 | ||
|     </dd>
 | ||
|     <dt>Line length</dt>
 | ||
|     <dd>
 | ||
|     Go has no line length limit.  Don't worry about overflowing a punched card.
 | ||
|     If a line feels too long, wrap it and indent with an extra tab.
 | ||
|     </dd>
 | ||
|     <dt>Parentheses</dt>
 | ||
|     <dd>
 | ||
|     Go needs fewer parentheses than C and Java: control structures (<code>if</code>,
 | ||
|     <code>for</code>, <code>switch</code>) do not have parentheses in
 | ||
|     their syntax.
 | ||
|     Also, the operator precedence hierarchy is shorter and clearer, so
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| x<<8 + y<<16
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
|     means what the spacing implies, unlike in the other languages.
 | ||
|     </dd>
 | ||
| </dl>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="commentary">Commentary</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go provides C-style <code>/* */</code> block comments
 | ||
| and C++-style <code>//</code> line comments.
 | ||
| Line comments are the norm;
 | ||
| block comments appear mostly as package comments, but
 | ||
| are useful within an expression or to disable large swaths of code.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The program—and web server—<code>godoc</code> processes
 | ||
| Go source files to extract documentation about the contents of the
 | ||
| package.
 | ||
| Comments that appear before top-level declarations, with no intervening newlines,
 | ||
| are extracted along with the declaration to serve as explanatory text for the item.
 | ||
| The nature and style of these comments determines the
 | ||
| quality of the documentation <code>godoc</code> produces.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Every package should have a <i>package comment</i>, a block
 | ||
| comment preceding the package clause.
 | ||
| For multi-file packages, the package comment only needs to be
 | ||
| present in one file, and any one will do.
 | ||
| The package comment should introduce the package and
 | ||
| provide information relevant to the package as a whole.
 | ||
| It will appear first on the <code>godoc</code> page and
 | ||
| should set up the detailed documentation that follows.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| /*
 | ||
| Package regexp implements a simple library for regular expressions.
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| The syntax of the regular expressions accepted is:
 | ||
| 
 | ||
|     regexp:
 | ||
|         concatenation { '|' concatenation }
 | ||
|     concatenation:
 | ||
|         { closure }
 | ||
|     closure:
 | ||
|         term [ '*' | '+' | '?' ]
 | ||
|     term:
 | ||
|         '^'
 | ||
|         '$'
 | ||
|         '.'
 | ||
|         character
 | ||
|         '[' [ '^' ] character-ranges ']'
 | ||
|         '(' regexp ')'
 | ||
| */
 | ||
| package regexp
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If the package is simple, the package comment can be brief.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Package path implements utility routines for
 | ||
| // manipulating slash-separated filename paths.
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Comments do not need extra formatting such as banners of stars.
 | ||
| The generated output may not even be presented in a fixed-width font, so don't depend
 | ||
| on spacing for alignment—<code>godoc</code>, like <code>gofmt</code>,
 | ||
| takes care of that.
 | ||
| The comments are uninterpreted plain text, so HTML and other
 | ||
| annotations such as <code>_this_</code> will reproduce <i>verbatim</i> and should
 | ||
| not be used.
 | ||
| One adjustment <code>godoc</code> does do is to display indented
 | ||
| text in a fixed-width font, suitable for program snippets.
 | ||
| The package comment for the
 | ||
| <a href="/pkg/fmt/"><code>fmt</code> package</a> uses this to good effect.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Depending on the context, <code>godoc</code> might not even
 | ||
| reformat comments, so make sure they look good straight up:
 | ||
| use correct spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure,
 | ||
| fold long lines, and so on.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Inside a package, any comment immediately preceding a top-level declaration
 | ||
| serves as a <i>doc comment</i> for that declaration.
 | ||
| Every exported (capitalized) name in a program should
 | ||
| have a doc comment.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Doc comments work best as complete sentences, which allow
 | ||
| a wide variety of automated presentations.
 | ||
| The first sentence should be a one-sentence summary that
 | ||
| starts with the name being declared.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Compile parses a regular expression and returns, if successful,
 | ||
| // a Regexp that can be used to match against text.
 | ||
| func Compile(str string) (*Regexp, error) {
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If every doc comment begins with the name of the item it describes,
 | ||
| the output of <code>godoc</code> can usefully be run through <code>grep</code>.
 | ||
| Imagine you couldn't remember the name "Compile" but were looking for
 | ||
| the parsing function for regular expressions, so you ran
 | ||
| the command,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| $ godoc regexp | grep -i parse
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If all the doc comments in the package began, "This function...", <code>grep</code>
 | ||
| wouldn't help you remember the name. But because the package starts each
 | ||
| doc comment with the name, you'd see something like this,
 | ||
| which recalls the word you're looking for.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| $ godoc regexp | grep parse
 | ||
|     Compile parses a regular expression and returns, if successful, a Regexp
 | ||
|     parsed. It simplifies safe initialization of global variables holding
 | ||
|     cannot be parsed. It simplifies safe initialization of global variables
 | ||
| $
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go's declaration syntax allows grouping of declarations.
 | ||
| A single doc comment can introduce a group of related constants or variables.
 | ||
| Since the whole declaration is presented, such a comment can often be perfunctory.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Error codes returned by failures to parse an expression.
 | ||
| var (
 | ||
|     ErrInternal      = errors.New("regexp: internal error")
 | ||
|     ErrUnmatchedLpar = errors.New("regexp: unmatched '('")
 | ||
|     ErrUnmatchedRpar = errors.New("regexp: unmatched ')'")
 | ||
|     ...
 | ||
| )
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Grouping can also indicate relationships between items,
 | ||
| such as the fact that a set of variables is protected by a mutex.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var (
 | ||
|     countLock   sync.Mutex
 | ||
|     inputCount  uint32
 | ||
|     outputCount uint32
 | ||
|     errorCount  uint32
 | ||
| )
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="names">Names</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Names are as important in Go as in any other language.
 | ||
| They even have semantic effect:
 | ||
| the visibility of a name outside a package is determined by whether its
 | ||
| first character is upper case.
 | ||
| It's therefore worth spending a little time talking about naming conventions
 | ||
| in Go programs.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="package-names">Package names</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| When a package is imported, the package name becomes an accessor for the
 | ||
| contents.  After
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| import "bytes"
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| the importing package can talk about <code>bytes.Buffer</code>.  It's
 | ||
| helpful if everyone using the package can use the same name to refer to
 | ||
| its contents, which implies that the package name should be good:
 | ||
| short, concise, evocative.  By convention, packages are given
 | ||
| lower case, single-word names; there should be no need for underscores
 | ||
| or mixedCaps.
 | ||
| Err on the side of brevity, since everyone using your
 | ||
| package will be typing that name.
 | ||
| And don't worry about collisions <i>a priori</i>.
 | ||
| The package name is only the default name for imports; it need not be unique
 | ||
| across all source code, and in the rare case of a collision the
 | ||
| importing package can choose a different name to use locally.
 | ||
| In any case, confusion is rare because the file name in the import
 | ||
| determines just which package is being used.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Another convention is that the package name is the base name of
 | ||
| its source directory;
 | ||
| the package in <code>src/encoding/base64</code>
 | ||
| is imported as <code>"encoding/base64"</code> but has name <code>base64</code>,
 | ||
| not <code>encoding_base64</code> and not <code>encodingBase64</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The importer of a package will use the name to refer to its contents,
 | ||
| so exported names in the package can use that fact
 | ||
| to avoid stutter.
 | ||
| (Don't use the <code>import .</code> notation, which can simplify
 | ||
| tests that must run outside the package they are testing, but should otherwise be avoided.)
 | ||
| For instance, the buffered reader type in the <code>bufio</code> package is called <code>Reader</code>,
 | ||
| not <code>BufReader</code>, because users see it as <code>bufio.Reader</code>,
 | ||
| which is a clear, concise name.
 | ||
| Moreover,
 | ||
| because imported entities are always addressed with their package name, <code>bufio.Reader</code>
 | ||
| does not conflict with <code>io.Reader</code>.
 | ||
| Similarly, the function to make new instances of <code>ring.Ring</code>—which
 | ||
| is the definition of a <em>constructor</em> in Go—would
 | ||
| normally be called <code>NewRing</code>, but since
 | ||
| <code>Ring</code> is the only type exported by the package, and since the
 | ||
| package is called <code>ring</code>, it's called just <code>New</code>,
 | ||
| which clients of the package see as <code>ring.New</code>.
 | ||
| Use the package structure to help you choose good names.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Another short example is <code>once.Do</code>;
 | ||
| <code>once.Do(setup)</code> reads well and would not be improved by
 | ||
| writing <code>once.DoOrWaitUntilDone(setup)</code>.
 | ||
| Long names don't automatically make things more readable.
 | ||
| A helpful doc comment can often be more valuable than an extra long name.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="Getters">Getters</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go doesn't provide automatic support for getters and setters.
 | ||
| There's nothing wrong with providing getters and setters yourself,
 | ||
| and it's often appropriate to do so, but it's neither idiomatic nor necessary
 | ||
| to put <code>Get</code> into the getter's name.  If you have a field called
 | ||
| <code>owner</code> (lower case, unexported), the getter method should be
 | ||
| called <code>Owner</code> (upper case, exported), not <code>GetOwner</code>.
 | ||
| The use of upper-case names for export provides the hook to discriminate
 | ||
| the field from the method.
 | ||
| A setter function, if needed, will likely be called <code>SetOwner</code>.
 | ||
| Both names read well in practice:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| owner := obj.Owner()
 | ||
| if owner != user {
 | ||
|     obj.SetOwner(user)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="interface-names">Interface names</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By convention, one-method interfaces are named by
 | ||
| the method name plus an -er suffix or similar modification
 | ||
| to construct an agent noun: <code>Reader</code>,
 | ||
| <code>Writer</code>, <code>Formatter</code>,
 | ||
| <code>CloseNotifier</code> etc.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There are a number of such names and it's productive to honor them and the function
 | ||
| names they capture.
 | ||
| <code>Read</code>, <code>Write</code>, <code>Close</code>, <code>Flush</code>,
 | ||
| <code>String</code> and so on have
 | ||
| canonical signatures and meanings.  To avoid confusion,
 | ||
| don't give your method one of those names unless it
 | ||
| has the same signature and meaning.
 | ||
| Conversely, if your type implements a method with the
 | ||
| same meaning as a method on a well-known type,
 | ||
| give it the same name and signature;
 | ||
| call your string-converter method <code>String</code> not <code>ToString</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="mixed-caps">MixedCaps</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Finally, the convention in Go is to use <code>MixedCaps</code>
 | ||
| or <code>mixedCaps</code> rather than underscores to write
 | ||
| multiword names.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="semicolons">Semicolons</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Like C, Go's formal grammar uses semicolons to terminate statements,
 | ||
| but unlike in C, those semicolons do not appear in the source.
 | ||
| Instead the lexer uses a simple rule to insert semicolons automatically
 | ||
| as it scans, so the input text is mostly free of them.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The rule is this. If the last token before a newline is an identifier
 | ||
| (which includes words like <code>int</code> and <code>float64</code>),
 | ||
| a basic literal such as a number or string constant, or one of the
 | ||
| tokens
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| break continue fallthrough return ++ -- ) }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| the lexer always inserts a semicolon after the token.
 | ||
| This could be summarized as, “if the newline comes
 | ||
| after a token that could end a statement, insert a semicolon”.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A semicolon can also be omitted immediately before a closing brace,
 | ||
| so a statement such as
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     go func() { for { dst <- <-src } }()
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| needs no semicolons.
 | ||
| Idiomatic Go programs have semicolons only in places such as
 | ||
| <code>for</code> loop clauses, to separate the initializer, condition, and
 | ||
| continuation elements.  They are also necessary to separate multiple
 | ||
| statements on a line, should you write code that way.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| One consequence of the semicolon insertion rules
 | ||
| is that you cannot put the opening brace of a
 | ||
| control structure (<code>if</code>, <code>for</code>, <code>switch</code>,
 | ||
| or <code>select</code>) on the next line.  If you do, a semicolon
 | ||
| will be inserted before the brace, which could cause unwanted
 | ||
| effects.  Write them like this
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if i < f() {
 | ||
|     g()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| not like this
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if i < f()  // wrong!
 | ||
| {           // wrong!
 | ||
|     g()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="control-structures">Control structures</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The control structures of Go are related to those of C but differ
 | ||
| in important ways.
 | ||
| There is no <code>do</code> or <code>while</code> loop, only a
 | ||
| slightly generalized
 | ||
| <code>for</code>;
 | ||
| <code>switch</code> is more flexible;
 | ||
| <code>if</code> and <code>switch</code> accept an optional
 | ||
| initialization statement like that of <code>for</code>;
 | ||
| <code>break</code> and <code>continue</code> statements
 | ||
| take an optional label to identify what to break or continue;
 | ||
| and there are new control structures including a type switch and a
 | ||
| multiway communications multiplexer, <code>select</code>.
 | ||
| The syntax is also slightly different:
 | ||
| there are no parentheses
 | ||
| and the bodies must always be brace-delimited.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="if">If</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In Go a simple <code>if</code> looks like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if x > 0 {
 | ||
|     return y
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Mandatory braces encourage writing simple <code>if</code> statements
 | ||
| on multiple lines.  It's good style to do so anyway,
 | ||
| especially when the body contains a control statement such as a
 | ||
| <code>return</code> or <code>break</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Since <code>if</code> and <code>switch</code> accept an initialization
 | ||
| statement, it's common to see one used to set up a local variable.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if err := file.Chmod(0664); err != nil {
 | ||
|     log.Print(err)
 | ||
|     return err
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p id="else">
 | ||
| In the Go libraries, you'll find that
 | ||
| when an <code>if</code> statement doesn't flow into the next statement—that is,
 | ||
| the body ends in <code>break</code>, <code>continue</code>,
 | ||
| <code>goto</code>, or <code>return</code>—the unnecessary
 | ||
| <code>else</code> is omitted.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| f, err := os.Open(name)
 | ||
| if err != nil {
 | ||
|     return err
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| codeUsing(f)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This is an example of a common situation where code must guard against a
 | ||
| sequence of error conditions.  The code reads well if the
 | ||
| successful flow of control runs down the page, eliminating error cases
 | ||
| as they arise.  Since error cases tend to end in <code>return</code>
 | ||
| statements, the resulting code needs no <code>else</code> statements.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| f, err := os.Open(name)
 | ||
| if err != nil {
 | ||
|     return err
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| d, err := f.Stat()
 | ||
| if err != nil {
 | ||
|     f.Close()
 | ||
|     return err
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| codeUsing(f, d)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="redeclaration">Redeclaration and reassignment</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| An aside: The last example in the previous section demonstrates a detail of how the
 | ||
| <code>:=</code> short declaration form works.
 | ||
| The declaration that calls <code>os.Open</code> reads,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| f, err := os.Open(name)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This statement declares two variables, <code>f</code> and <code>err</code>.
 | ||
| A few lines later, the call to <code>f.Stat</code> reads,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| d, err := f.Stat()
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| which looks as if it declares <code>d</code> and <code>err</code>.
 | ||
| Notice, though, that <code>err</code> appears in both statements.
 | ||
| This duplication is legal: <code>err</code> is declared by the first statement,
 | ||
| but only <em>re-assigned</em> in the second.
 | ||
| This means that the call to <code>f.Stat</code> uses the existing
 | ||
| <code>err</code> variable declared above, and just gives it a new value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In a <code>:=</code> declaration a variable <code>v</code> may appear even
 | ||
| if it has already been declared, provided:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <ul>
 | ||
| <li>this declaration is in the same scope as the existing declaration of <code>v</code>
 | ||
| (if <code>v</code> is already declared in an outer scope, the declaration will create a new variable §),</li>
 | ||
| <li>the corresponding value in the initialization is assignable to <code>v</code>, and</li>
 | ||
| <li>there is at least one other variable in the declaration that is being declared anew.</li>
 | ||
| </ul>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This unusual property is pure pragmatism,
 | ||
| making it easy to use a single <code>err</code> value, for example,
 | ||
| in a long <code>if-else</code> chain.
 | ||
| You'll see it used often.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| § It's worth noting here that in Go the scope of function parameters and return values
 | ||
| is the same as the function body, even though they appear lexically outside the braces
 | ||
| that enclose the body.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="for">For</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The Go <code>for</code> loop is similar to—but not the same as—C's.
 | ||
| It unifies <code>for</code>
 | ||
| and <code>while</code> and there is no <code>do-while</code>.
 | ||
| There are three forms, only one of which has semicolons.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Like a C for
 | ||
| for init; condition; post { }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Like a C while
 | ||
| for condition { }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Like a C for(;;)
 | ||
| for { }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Short declarations make it easy to declare the index variable right in the loop.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| sum := 0
 | ||
| for i := 0; i < 10; i++ {
 | ||
|     sum += i
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If you're looping over an array, slice, string, or map,
 | ||
| or reading from a channel, a <code>range</code> clause can
 | ||
| manage the loop.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| for key, value := range oldMap {
 | ||
|     newMap[key] = value
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If you only need the first item in the range (the key or index), drop the second:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| for key := range m {
 | ||
|     if key.expired() {
 | ||
|         delete(m, key)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If you only need the second item in the range (the value), use the <em>blank identifier</em>, an underscore, to discard the first:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| sum := 0
 | ||
| for _, value := range array {
 | ||
|     sum += value
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The blank identifier has many uses, as described in <a href="#blank">a later section</a>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| For strings, the <code>range</code> does more work for you, breaking out individual
 | ||
| Unicode code points by parsing the UTF-8.
 | ||
| Erroneous encodings consume one byte and produce the
 | ||
| replacement rune U+FFFD.
 | ||
| (The name (with associated builtin type) <code>rune</code> is Go terminology for a
 | ||
| single Unicode code point.
 | ||
| See <a href="/ref/spec#Rune_literals">the language specification</a>
 | ||
| for details.)
 | ||
| The loop
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| for pos, char := range "日本\x80語" { // \x80 is an illegal UTF-8 encoding
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("character %#U starts at byte position %d\n", char, pos)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| prints
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| character U+65E5 '日' starts at byte position 0
 | ||
| character U+672C '本' starts at byte position 3
 | ||
| character U+FFFD '<27>' starts at byte position 6
 | ||
| character U+8A9E '語' starts at byte position 7
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Finally, Go has no comma operator and <code>++</code> and <code>--</code>
 | ||
| are statements not expressions.
 | ||
| Thus if you want to run multiple variables in a <code>for</code>
 | ||
| you should use parallel assignment (although that precludes <code>++</code> and <code>--</code>).
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Reverse a
 | ||
| for i, j := 0, len(a)-1; i < j; i, j = i+1, j-1 {
 | ||
|     a[i], a[j] = a[j], a[i]
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="switch">Switch</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go's <code>switch</code> is more general than C's.
 | ||
| The expressions need not be constants or even integers,
 | ||
| the cases are evaluated top to bottom until a match is found,
 | ||
| and if the <code>switch</code> has no expression it switches on
 | ||
| <code>true</code>.
 | ||
| It's therefore possible—and idiomatic—to write an
 | ||
| <code>if</code>-<code>else</code>-<code>if</code>-<code>else</code>
 | ||
| chain as a <code>switch</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func unhex(c byte) byte {
 | ||
|     switch {
 | ||
|     case '0' <= c && c <= '9':
 | ||
|         return c - '0'
 | ||
|     case 'a' <= c && c <= 'f':
 | ||
|         return c - 'a' + 10
 | ||
|     case 'A' <= c && c <= 'F':
 | ||
|         return c - 'A' + 10
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return 0
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There is no automatic fall through, but cases can be presented
 | ||
| in comma-separated lists.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func shouldEscape(c byte) bool {
 | ||
|     switch c {
 | ||
|     case ' ', '?', '&', '=', '#', '+', '%':
 | ||
|         return true
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return false
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Although they are not nearly as common in Go as some other C-like
 | ||
| languages, <code>break</code> statements can be used to terminate
 | ||
| a <code>switch</code> early.
 | ||
| Sometimes, though, it's necessary to break out of a surrounding loop,
 | ||
| not the switch, and in Go that can be accomplished by putting a label
 | ||
| on the loop and "breaking" to that label.
 | ||
| This example shows both uses.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| Loop:
 | ||
| 	for n := 0; n < len(src); n += size {
 | ||
| 		switch {
 | ||
| 		case src[n] < sizeOne:
 | ||
| 			if validateOnly {
 | ||
| 				break
 | ||
| 			}
 | ||
| 			size = 1
 | ||
| 			update(src[n])
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 		case src[n] < sizeTwo:
 | ||
| 			if n+1 >= len(src) {
 | ||
| 				err = errShortInput
 | ||
| 				break Loop
 | ||
| 			}
 | ||
| 			if validateOnly {
 | ||
| 				break
 | ||
| 			}
 | ||
| 			size = 2
 | ||
| 			update(src[n] + src[n+1]<<shift)
 | ||
| 		}
 | ||
| 	}
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Of course, the <code>continue</code> statement also accepts an optional label
 | ||
| but it applies only to loops.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| To close this section, here's a comparison routine for byte slices that uses two
 | ||
| <code>switch</code> statements:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Compare returns an integer comparing the two byte slices,
 | ||
| // lexicographically.
 | ||
| // The result will be 0 if a == b, -1 if a < b, and +1 if a > b
 | ||
| func Compare(a, b []byte) int {
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < len(a) && i < len(b); i++ {
 | ||
|         switch {
 | ||
|         case a[i] > b[i]:
 | ||
|             return 1
 | ||
|         case a[i] < b[i]:
 | ||
|             return -1
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     switch {
 | ||
|     case len(a) > len(b):
 | ||
|         return 1
 | ||
|     case len(a) < len(b):
 | ||
|         return -1
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return 0
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="type_switch">Type switch</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A switch can also be used to discover the dynamic type of an interface
 | ||
| variable.  Such a <em>type switch</em> uses the syntax of a type
 | ||
| assertion with the keyword <code>type</code> inside the parentheses.
 | ||
| If the switch declares a variable in the expression, the variable will
 | ||
| have the corresponding type in each clause.
 | ||
| It's also idiomatic to reuse the name in such cases, in effect declaring
 | ||
| a new variable with the same name but a different type in each case.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var t interface{}
 | ||
| t = functionOfSomeType()
 | ||
| switch t := t.(type) {
 | ||
| default:
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("unexpected type %T\n", t)     // %T prints whatever type t has
 | ||
| case bool:
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("boolean %t\n", t)             // t has type bool
 | ||
| case int:
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("integer %d\n", t)             // t has type int
 | ||
| case *bool:
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("pointer to boolean %t\n", *t) // t has type *bool
 | ||
| case *int:
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("pointer to integer %d\n", *t) // t has type *int
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="functions">Functions</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="multiple-returns">Multiple return values</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| One of Go's unusual features is that functions and methods
 | ||
| can return multiple values.  This form can be used to
 | ||
| improve on a couple of clumsy idioms in C programs: in-band
 | ||
| error returns such as <code>-1</code> for <code>EOF</code>
 | ||
| and modifying an argument passed by address.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In C, a write error is signaled by a negative count with the
 | ||
| error code secreted away in a volatile location.
 | ||
| In Go, <code>Write</code>
 | ||
| can return a count <i>and</i> an error: “Yes, you wrote some
 | ||
| bytes but not all of them because you filled the device”.
 | ||
| The signature of the <code>Write</code> method on files from
 | ||
| package <code>os</code> is:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (file *File) Write(b []byte) (n int, err error)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| and as the documentation says, it returns the number of bytes
 | ||
| written and a non-nil <code>error</code> when <code>n</code>
 | ||
| <code>!=</code> <code>len(b)</code>.
 | ||
| This is a common style; see the section on error handling for more examples.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A similar approach obviates the need to pass a pointer to a return
 | ||
| value to simulate a reference parameter.
 | ||
| Here's a simple-minded function to
 | ||
| grab a number from a position in a byte slice, returning the number
 | ||
| and the next position.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func nextInt(b []byte, i int) (int, int) {
 | ||
|     for ; i < len(b) && !isDigit(b[i]); i++ {
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     x := 0
 | ||
|     for ; i < len(b) && isDigit(b[i]); i++ {
 | ||
|         x = x*10 + int(b[i]) - '0'
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return x, i
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| You could use it to scan the numbers in an input slice <code>b</code> like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < len(b); {
 | ||
|         x, i = nextInt(b, i)
 | ||
|         fmt.Println(x)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="named-results">Named result parameters</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The return or result "parameters" of a Go function can be given names and
 | ||
| used as regular variables, just like the incoming parameters.
 | ||
| When named, they are initialized to the zero values for their types when
 | ||
| the function begins; if the function executes a <code>return</code> statement
 | ||
| with no arguments, the current values of the result parameters are
 | ||
| used as the returned values.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The names are not mandatory but they can make code shorter and clearer:
 | ||
| they're documentation.
 | ||
| If we name the results of <code>nextInt</code> it becomes
 | ||
| obvious which returned <code>int</code>
 | ||
| is which.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func nextInt(b []byte, pos int) (value, nextPos int) {
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Because named results are initialized and tied to an unadorned return, they can simplify
 | ||
| as well as clarify.  Here's a version
 | ||
| of <code>io.ReadFull</code> that uses them well:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func ReadFull(r Reader, buf []byte) (n int, err error) {
 | ||
|     for len(buf) > 0 && err == nil {
 | ||
|         var nr int
 | ||
|         nr, err = r.Read(buf)
 | ||
|         n += nr
 | ||
|         buf = buf[nr:]
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="defer">Defer</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go's <code>defer</code> statement schedules a function call (the
 | ||
| <i>deferred</i> function) to be run immediately before the function
 | ||
| executing the <code>defer</code> returns.  It's an unusual but
 | ||
| effective way to deal with situations such as resources that must be
 | ||
| released regardless of which path a function takes to return.  The
 | ||
| canonical examples are unlocking a mutex or closing a file.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Contents returns the file's contents as a string.
 | ||
| func Contents(filename string) (string, error) {
 | ||
|     f, err := os.Open(filename)
 | ||
|     if err != nil {
 | ||
|         return "", err
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     defer f.Close()  // f.Close will run when we're finished.
 | ||
| 
 | ||
|     var result []byte
 | ||
|     buf := make([]byte, 100)
 | ||
|     for {
 | ||
|         n, err := f.Read(buf[0:])
 | ||
|         result = append(result, buf[0:n]...) // append is discussed later.
 | ||
|         if err != nil {
 | ||
|             if err == io.EOF {
 | ||
|                 break
 | ||
|             }
 | ||
|             return "", err  // f will be closed if we return here.
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return string(result), nil // f will be closed if we return here.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Deferring a call to a function such as <code>Close</code> has two advantages.  First, it
 | ||
| guarantees that you will never forget to close the file, a mistake
 | ||
| that's easy to make if you later edit the function to add a new return
 | ||
| path.  Second, it means that the close sits near the open,
 | ||
| which is much clearer than placing it at the end of the function.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The arguments to the deferred function (which include the receiver if
 | ||
| the function is a method) are evaluated when the <i>defer</i>
 | ||
| executes, not when the <i>call</i> executes.  Besides avoiding worries
 | ||
| about variables changing values as the function executes, this means
 | ||
| that a single deferred call site can defer multiple function
 | ||
| executions.  Here's a silly example.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| for i := 0; i < 5; i++ {
 | ||
|     defer fmt.Printf("%d ", i)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Deferred functions are executed in LIFO order, so this code will cause
 | ||
| <code>4 3 2 1 0</code> to be printed when the function returns.  A
 | ||
| more plausible example is a simple way to trace function execution
 | ||
| through the program.  We could write a couple of simple tracing
 | ||
| routines like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func trace(s string)   { fmt.Println("entering:", s) }
 | ||
| func untrace(s string) { fmt.Println("leaving:", s) }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Use them like this:
 | ||
| func a() {
 | ||
|     trace("a")
 | ||
|     defer untrace("a")
 | ||
|     // do something....
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| We can do better by exploiting the fact that arguments to deferred
 | ||
| functions are evaluated when the <code>defer</code> executes.  The
 | ||
| tracing routine can set up the argument to the untracing routine.
 | ||
| This example:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func trace(s string) string {
 | ||
|     fmt.Println("entering:", s)
 | ||
|     return s
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func un(s string) {
 | ||
|     fmt.Println("leaving:", s)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func a() {
 | ||
|     defer un(trace("a"))
 | ||
|     fmt.Println("in a")
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func b() {
 | ||
|     defer un(trace("b"))
 | ||
|     fmt.Println("in b")
 | ||
|     a()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func main() {
 | ||
|     b()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| prints
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| entering: b
 | ||
| in b
 | ||
| entering: a
 | ||
| in a
 | ||
| leaving: a
 | ||
| leaving: b
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| For programmers accustomed to block-level resource management from
 | ||
| other languages, <code>defer</code> may seem peculiar, but its most
 | ||
| interesting and powerful applications come precisely from the fact
 | ||
| that it's not block-based but function-based.  In the section on
 | ||
| <code>panic</code> and <code>recover</code> we'll see another
 | ||
| example of its possibilities.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="data">Data</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="allocation_new">Allocation with <code>new</code></h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go has two allocation primitives, the built-in functions
 | ||
| <code>new</code> and <code>make</code>.
 | ||
| They do different things and apply to different types, which can be confusing,
 | ||
| but the rules are simple.
 | ||
| Let's talk about <code>new</code> first.
 | ||
| It's a built-in function that allocates memory, but unlike its namesakes
 | ||
| in some other languages it does not <em>initialize</em> the memory,
 | ||
| it only <em>zeros</em> it.
 | ||
| That is,
 | ||
| <code>new(T)</code> allocates zeroed storage for a new item of type
 | ||
| <code>T</code> and returns its address, a value of type <code>*T</code>.
 | ||
| In Go terminology, it returns a pointer to a newly allocated zero value of type
 | ||
| <code>T</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Since the memory returned by <code>new</code> is zeroed, it's helpful to arrange
 | ||
| when designing your data structures that the
 | ||
| zero value of each type can be used without further initialization.  This means a user of
 | ||
| the data structure can create one with <code>new</code> and get right to
 | ||
| work.
 | ||
| For example, the documentation for <code>bytes.Buffer</code> states that
 | ||
| "the zero value for <code>Buffer</code> is an empty buffer ready to use."
 | ||
| Similarly, <code>sync.Mutex</code> does not
 | ||
| have an explicit constructor or <code>Init</code> method.
 | ||
| Instead, the zero value for a <code>sync.Mutex</code>
 | ||
| is defined to be an unlocked mutex.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The zero-value-is-useful property works transitively. Consider this type declaration.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type SyncedBuffer struct {
 | ||
|     lock    sync.Mutex
 | ||
|     buffer  bytes.Buffer
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Values of type <code>SyncedBuffer</code> are also ready to use immediately upon allocation
 | ||
| or just declaration.  In the next snippet, both <code>p</code> and <code>v</code> will work
 | ||
| correctly without further arrangement.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| p := new(SyncedBuffer)  // type *SyncedBuffer
 | ||
| var v SyncedBuffer      // type  SyncedBuffer
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="composite_literals">Constructors and composite literals</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Sometimes the zero value isn't good enough and an initializing
 | ||
| constructor is necessary, as in this example derived from
 | ||
| package <code>os</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func NewFile(fd int, name string) *File {
 | ||
|     if fd < 0 {
 | ||
|         return nil
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     f := new(File)
 | ||
|     f.fd = fd
 | ||
|     f.name = name
 | ||
|     f.dirinfo = nil
 | ||
|     f.nepipe = 0
 | ||
|     return f
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There's a lot of boiler plate in there.  We can simplify it
 | ||
| using a <i>composite literal</i>, which is
 | ||
| an expression that creates a
 | ||
| new instance each time it is evaluated.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func NewFile(fd int, name string) *File {
 | ||
|     if fd < 0 {
 | ||
|         return nil
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     f := File{fd, name, nil, 0}
 | ||
|     return &f
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Note that, unlike in C, it's perfectly OK to return the address of a local variable;
 | ||
| the storage associated with the variable survives after the function
 | ||
| returns.
 | ||
| In fact, taking the address of a composite literal
 | ||
| allocates a fresh instance each time it is evaluated,
 | ||
| so we can combine these last two lines.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     return &File{fd, name, nil, 0}
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The fields of a composite literal are laid out in order and must all be present.
 | ||
| However, by labeling the elements explicitly as <i>field</i><code>:</code><i>value</i>
 | ||
| pairs, the initializers can appear in any
 | ||
| order, with the missing ones left as their respective zero values.  Thus we could say
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     return &File{fd: fd, name: name}
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| As a limiting case, if a composite literal contains no fields at all, it creates
 | ||
| a zero value for the type.  The expressions <code>new(File)</code> and <code>&File{}</code> are equivalent.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Composite literals can also be created for arrays, slices, and maps,
 | ||
| with the field labels being indices or map keys as appropriate.
 | ||
| In these examples, the initializations work regardless of the values of <code>Enone</code>,
 | ||
| <code>Eio</code>, and <code>Einval</code>, as long as they are distinct.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| a := [...]string   {Enone: "no error", Eio: "Eio", Einval: "invalid argument"}
 | ||
| s := []string      {Enone: "no error", Eio: "Eio", Einval: "invalid argument"}
 | ||
| m := map[int]string{Enone: "no error", Eio: "Eio", Einval: "invalid argument"}
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="allocation_make">Allocation with <code>make</code></h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Back to allocation.
 | ||
| The built-in function <code>make(T, </code><i>args</i><code>)</code> serves
 | ||
| a purpose different from <code>new(T)</code>.
 | ||
| It creates slices, maps, and channels only, and it returns an <em>initialized</em>
 | ||
| (not <em>zeroed</em>)
 | ||
| value of type <code>T</code> (not <code>*T</code>).
 | ||
| The reason for the distinction
 | ||
| is that these three types represent, under the covers, references to data structures that
 | ||
| must be initialized before use.
 | ||
| A slice, for example, is a three-item descriptor
 | ||
| containing a pointer to the data (inside an array), the length, and the
 | ||
| capacity, and until those items are initialized, the slice is <code>nil</code>.
 | ||
| For slices, maps, and channels,
 | ||
| <code>make</code> initializes the internal data structure and prepares
 | ||
| the value for use.
 | ||
| For instance,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| make([]int, 10, 100)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| allocates an array of 100 ints and then creates a slice
 | ||
| structure with length 10 and a capacity of 100 pointing at the first
 | ||
| 10 elements of the array.
 | ||
| (When making a slice, the capacity can be omitted; see the section on slices
 | ||
| for more information.)
 | ||
| In contrast, <code>new([]int)</code> returns a pointer to a newly allocated, zeroed slice
 | ||
| structure, that is, a pointer to a <code>nil</code> slice value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| These examples illustrate the difference between <code>new</code> and
 | ||
| <code>make</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var p *[]int = new([]int)       // allocates slice structure; *p == nil; rarely useful
 | ||
| var v  []int = make([]int, 100) // the slice v now refers to a new array of 100 ints
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Unnecessarily complex:
 | ||
| var p *[]int = new([]int)
 | ||
| *p = make([]int, 100, 100)
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Idiomatic:
 | ||
| v := make([]int, 100)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Remember that <code>make</code> applies only to maps, slices and channels
 | ||
| and does not return a pointer.
 | ||
| To obtain an explicit pointer allocate with <code>new</code> or take the address
 | ||
| of a variable explicitly.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="arrays">Arrays</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Arrays are useful when planning the detailed layout of memory and sometimes
 | ||
| can help avoid allocation, but primarily
 | ||
| they are a building block for slices, the subject of the next section.
 | ||
| To lay the foundation for that topic, here are a few words about arrays.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There are major differences between the ways arrays work in Go and C.
 | ||
| In Go,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <ul>
 | ||
| <li>
 | ||
| Arrays are values. Assigning one array to another copies all the elements.
 | ||
| </li>
 | ||
| <li>
 | ||
| In particular, if you pass an array to a function, it
 | ||
| will receive a <i>copy</i> of the array, not a pointer to it.
 | ||
| <li>
 | ||
| The size of an array is part of its type.  The types <code>[10]int</code>
 | ||
| and <code>[20]int</code> are distinct.
 | ||
| </li>
 | ||
| </ul>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The value property can be useful but also expensive; if you want C-like behavior and efficiency,
 | ||
| you can pass a pointer to the array.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Sum(a *[3]float64) (sum float64) {
 | ||
|     for _, v := range *a {
 | ||
|         sum += v
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| array := [...]float64{7.0, 8.5, 9.1}
 | ||
| x := Sum(&array)  // Note the explicit address-of operator
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| But even this style isn't idiomatic Go.
 | ||
| Use slices instead.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="slices">Slices</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Slices wrap arrays to give a more general, powerful, and convenient
 | ||
| interface to sequences of data.  Except for items with explicit
 | ||
| dimension such as transformation matrices, most array programming in
 | ||
| Go is done with slices rather than simple arrays.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Slices hold references to an underlying array, and if you assign one
 | ||
| slice to another, both refer to the same array.
 | ||
| If a function takes a slice argument, changes it makes to
 | ||
| the elements of the slice will be visible to the caller, analogous to
 | ||
| passing a pointer to the underlying array.  A <code>Read</code>
 | ||
| function can therefore accept a slice argument rather than a pointer
 | ||
| and a count; the length within the slice sets an upper
 | ||
| limit of how much data to read.  Here is the signature of the
 | ||
| <code>Read</code> method of the <code>File</code> type in package
 | ||
| <code>os</code>:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (f *File) Read(buf []byte) (n int, err error)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The method returns the number of bytes read and an error value, if
 | ||
| any.
 | ||
| To read into the first 32 bytes of a larger buffer
 | ||
| <code>buf</code>, <i>slice</i> (here used as a verb) the buffer.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     n, err := f.Read(buf[0:32])
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Such slicing is common and efficient.  In fact, leaving efficiency aside for
 | ||
| the moment, the following snippet would also read the first 32 bytes of the buffer.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     var n int
 | ||
|     var err error
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < 32; i++ {
 | ||
|         nbytes, e := f.Read(buf[i:i+1])  // Read one byte.
 | ||
|         if nbytes == 0 || e != nil {
 | ||
|             err = e
 | ||
|             break
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|         n += nbytes
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The length of a slice may be changed as long as it still fits within
 | ||
| the limits of the underlying array; just assign it to a slice of
 | ||
| itself.  The <i>capacity</i> of a slice, accessible by the built-in
 | ||
| function <code>cap</code>, reports the maximum length the slice may
 | ||
| assume.  Here is a function to append data to a slice.  If the data
 | ||
| exceeds the capacity, the slice is reallocated.  The
 | ||
| resulting slice is returned.  The function uses the fact that
 | ||
| <code>len</code> and <code>cap</code> are legal when applied to the
 | ||
| <code>nil</code> slice, and return 0.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Append(slice, data []byte) []byte {
 | ||
|     l := len(slice)
 | ||
|     if l + len(data) > cap(slice) {  // reallocate
 | ||
|         // Allocate double what's needed, for future growth.
 | ||
|         newSlice := make([]byte, (l+len(data))*2)
 | ||
|         // The copy function is predeclared and works for any slice type.
 | ||
|         copy(newSlice, slice)
 | ||
|         slice = newSlice
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     slice = slice[0:l+len(data)]
 | ||
|     copy(slice[l:], data)
 | ||
|     return slice
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| We must return the slice afterwards because, although <code>Append</code>
 | ||
| can modify the elements of <code>slice</code>, the slice itself (the run-time data
 | ||
| structure holding the pointer, length, and capacity) is passed by value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The idea of appending to a slice is so useful it's captured by the
 | ||
| <code>append</code> built-in function.  To understand that function's
 | ||
| design, though, we need a little more information, so we'll return
 | ||
| to it later.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="two_dimensional_slices">Two-dimensional slices</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go's arrays and slices are one-dimensional.
 | ||
| To create the equivalent of a 2D array or slice, it is necessary to define an array-of-arrays
 | ||
| or slice-of-slices, like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Transform [3][3]float64  // A 3x3 array, really an array of arrays.
 | ||
| type LinesOfText [][]byte     // A slice of byte slices.
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Because slices are variable-length, it is possible to have each inner
 | ||
| slice be a different length.
 | ||
| That can be a common situation, as in our <code>LinesOfText</code>
 | ||
| example: each line has an independent length.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| text := LinesOfText{
 | ||
| 	[]byte("Now is the time"),
 | ||
| 	[]byte("for all good gophers"),
 | ||
| 	[]byte("to bring some fun to the party."),
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Sometimes it's necessary to allocate a 2D slice, a situation that can arise when
 | ||
| processing scan lines of pixels, for instance.
 | ||
| There are two ways to achieve this.
 | ||
| One is to allocate each slice independently; the other
 | ||
| is to allocate a single array and point the individual slices into it.
 | ||
| Which to use depends on your application.
 | ||
| If the slices might grow or shrink, they should be allocated independently
 | ||
| to avoid overwriting the next line; if not, it can be more efficient to construct
 | ||
| the object with a single allocation.
 | ||
| For reference, here are sketches of the two methods.
 | ||
| First, a line at a time:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Allocate the top-level slice.
 | ||
| picture := make([][]uint8, YSize) // One row per unit of y.
 | ||
| // Loop over the rows, allocating the slice for each row.
 | ||
| for i := range picture {
 | ||
| 	picture[i] = make([]uint8, XSize)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| And now as one allocation, sliced into lines:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Allocate the top-level slice, the same as before.
 | ||
| picture := make([][]uint8, YSize) // One row per unit of y.
 | ||
| // Allocate one large slice to hold all the pixels.
 | ||
| pixels := make([]uint8, XSize*YSize) // Has type []uint8 even though picture is [][]uint8.
 | ||
| // Loop over the rows, slicing each row from the front of the remaining pixels slice.
 | ||
| for i := range picture {
 | ||
| 	picture[i], pixels = pixels[:XSize], pixels[XSize:]
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="maps">Maps</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Maps are a convenient and powerful built-in data structure that associate
 | ||
| values of one type (the <em>key</em>) with values of another type
 | ||
| (the <em>element</em> or <em>value</em>).
 | ||
| The key can be of any type for which the equality operator is defined,
 | ||
| such as integers,
 | ||
| floating point and complex numbers,
 | ||
| strings, pointers, interfaces (as long as the dynamic type
 | ||
| supports equality), structs and arrays.
 | ||
| Slices cannot be used as map keys,
 | ||
| because equality is not defined on them.
 | ||
| Like slices, maps hold references to an underlying data structure.
 | ||
| If you pass a map to a function
 | ||
| that changes the contents of the map, the changes will be visible
 | ||
| in the caller.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Maps can be constructed using the usual composite literal syntax
 | ||
| with colon-separated key-value pairs,
 | ||
| so it's easy to build them during initialization.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var timeZone = map[string]int{
 | ||
|     "UTC":  0*60*60,
 | ||
|     "EST": -5*60*60,
 | ||
|     "CST": -6*60*60,
 | ||
|     "MST": -7*60*60,
 | ||
|     "PST": -8*60*60,
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Assigning and fetching map values looks syntactically just like
 | ||
| doing the same for arrays and slices except that the index doesn't
 | ||
| need to be an integer.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| offset := timeZone["EST"]
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| An attempt to fetch a map value with a key that
 | ||
| is not present in the map will return the zero value for the type
 | ||
| of the entries
 | ||
| in the map.  For instance, if the map contains integers, looking
 | ||
| up a non-existent key will return <code>0</code>.
 | ||
| A set can be implemented as a map with value type <code>bool</code>.
 | ||
| Set the map entry to <code>true</code> to put the value in the set, and then
 | ||
| test it by simple indexing.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| attended := map[string]bool{
 | ||
|     "Ann": true,
 | ||
|     "Joe": true,
 | ||
|     ...
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| if attended[person] { // will be false if person is not in the map
 | ||
|     fmt.Println(person, "was at the meeting")
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Sometimes you need to distinguish a missing entry from
 | ||
| a zero value.  Is there an entry for <code>"UTC"</code>
 | ||
| or is that 0 because it's not in the map at all?
 | ||
| You can discriminate with a form of multiple assignment.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var seconds int
 | ||
| var ok bool
 | ||
| seconds, ok = timeZone[tz]
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| For obvious reasons this is called the “comma ok” idiom.
 | ||
| In this example, if <code>tz</code> is present, <code>seconds</code>
 | ||
| will be set appropriately and <code>ok</code> will be true; if not,
 | ||
| <code>seconds</code> will be set to zero and <code>ok</code> will
 | ||
| be false.
 | ||
| Here's a function that puts it together with a nice error report:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func offset(tz string) int {
 | ||
|     if seconds, ok := timeZone[tz]; ok {
 | ||
|         return seconds
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     log.Println("unknown time zone:", tz)
 | ||
|     return 0
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| To test for presence in the map without worrying about the actual value,
 | ||
| you can use the <a href="#blank">blank identifier</a> (<code>_</code>)
 | ||
| in place of the usual variable for the value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| _, present := timeZone[tz]
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| To delete a map entry, use the <code>delete</code>
 | ||
| built-in function, whose arguments are the map and the key to be deleted.
 | ||
| It's safe to do this even if the key is already absent
 | ||
| from the map.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| delete(timeZone, "PDT")  // Now on Standard Time
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="printing">Printing</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Formatted printing in Go uses a style similar to C's <code>printf</code>
 | ||
| family but is richer and more general. The functions live in the <code>fmt</code>
 | ||
| package and have capitalized names: <code>fmt.Printf</code>, <code>fmt.Fprintf</code>,
 | ||
| <code>fmt.Sprintf</code> and so on.  The string functions (<code>Sprintf</code> etc.)
 | ||
| return a string rather than filling in a provided buffer.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| You don't need to provide a format string.  For each of <code>Printf</code>,
 | ||
| <code>Fprintf</code> and <code>Sprintf</code> there is another pair
 | ||
| of functions, for instance <code>Print</code> and <code>Println</code>.
 | ||
| These functions do not take a format string but instead generate a default
 | ||
| format for each argument. The <code>Println</code> versions also insert a blank
 | ||
| between arguments and append a newline to the output while
 | ||
| the <code>Print</code> versions add blanks only if the operand on neither side is a string.
 | ||
| In this example each line produces the same output.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("Hello %d\n", 23)
 | ||
| fmt.Fprint(os.Stdout, "Hello ", 23, "\n")
 | ||
| fmt.Println("Hello", 23)
 | ||
| fmt.Println(fmt.Sprint("Hello ", 23))
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The formatted print functions <code>fmt.Fprint</code>
 | ||
| and friends take as a first argument any object
 | ||
| that implements the <code>io.Writer</code> interface; the variables <code>os.Stdout</code>
 | ||
| and <code>os.Stderr</code> are familiar instances.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Here things start to diverge from C.  First, the numeric formats such as <code>%d</code>
 | ||
| do not take flags for signedness or size; instead, the printing routines use the
 | ||
| type of the argument to decide these properties.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var x uint64 = 1<<64 - 1
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%d %x; %d %x\n", x, x, int64(x), int64(x))
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| prints
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| 18446744073709551615 ffffffffffffffff; -1 -1
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If you just want the default conversion, such as decimal for integers, you can use
 | ||
| the catchall format <code>%v</code> (for “value”); the result is exactly
 | ||
| what <code>Print</code> and <code>Println</code> would produce.
 | ||
| Moreover, that format can print <em>any</em> value, even arrays, slices, structs, and
 | ||
| maps.  Here is a print statement for the time zone map defined in the previous section.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%v\n", timeZone)  // or just fmt.Println(timeZone)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| which gives output
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| map[CST:-21600 PST:-28800 EST:-18000 UTC:0 MST:-25200]
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| For maps the keys may be output in any order, of course.
 | ||
| When printing a struct, the modified format <code>%+v</code> annotates the
 | ||
| fields of the structure with their names, and for any value the alternate
 | ||
| format <code>%#v</code> prints the value in full Go syntax.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type T struct {
 | ||
|     a int
 | ||
|     b float64
 | ||
|     c string
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| t := &T{ 7, -2.35, "abc\tdef" }
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%v\n", t)
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%+v\n", t)
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%#v\n", t)
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%#v\n", timeZone)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| prints
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| &{7 -2.35 abc   def}
 | ||
| &{a:7 b:-2.35 c:abc     def}
 | ||
| &main.T{a:7, b:-2.35, c:"abc\tdef"}
 | ||
| map[string] int{"CST":-21600, "PST":-28800, "EST":-18000, "UTC":0, "MST":-25200}
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| (Note the ampersands.)
 | ||
| That quoted string format is also available through <code>%q</code> when
 | ||
| applied to a value of type <code>string</code> or <code>[]byte</code>.
 | ||
| The alternate format <code>%#q</code> will use backquotes instead if possible.
 | ||
| (The <code>%q</code> format also applies to integers and runes, producing a
 | ||
| single-quoted rune constant.)
 | ||
| Also, <code>%x</code> works on strings, byte arrays and byte slices as well as
 | ||
| on integers, generating a long hexadecimal string, and with
 | ||
| a space in the format (<code>% x</code>) it puts spaces between the bytes.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Another handy format is <code>%T</code>, which prints the <em>type</em> of a value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%T\n", timeZone)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| prints
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| map[string] int
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If you want to control the default format for a custom type, all that's required is to define
 | ||
| a method with the signature <code>String() string</code> on the type.
 | ||
| For our simple type <code>T</code>, that might look like this.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (t *T) String() string {
 | ||
|     return fmt.Sprintf("%d/%g/%q", t.a, t.b, t.c)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("%v\n", t)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| to print in the format
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| 7/-2.35/"abc\tdef"
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| (If you need to print <em>values</em> of type <code>T</code> as well as pointers to <code>T</code>,
 | ||
| the receiver for <code>String</code> must be of value type; this example used a pointer because
 | ||
| that's more efficient and idiomatic for struct types.
 | ||
| See the section below on <a href="#pointers_vs_values">pointers vs. value receivers</a> for more information.)
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Our <code>String</code> method is able to call <code>Sprintf</code> because the
 | ||
| print routines are fully reentrant and can be wrapped this way.
 | ||
| There is one important detail to understand about this approach,
 | ||
| however: don't construct a <code>String</code> method by calling
 | ||
| <code>Sprintf</code> in a way that will recur into your <code>String</code>
 | ||
| method indefinitely.  This can happen if the <code>Sprintf</code>
 | ||
| call attempts to print the receiver directly as a string, which in
 | ||
| turn will invoke the method again.  It's a common and easy mistake
 | ||
| to make, as this example shows.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type MyString string
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (m MyString) String() string {
 | ||
|     return fmt.Sprintf("MyString=%s", m) // Error: will recur forever.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| It's also easy to fix: convert the argument to the basic string type, which does not have the
 | ||
| method.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type MyString string
 | ||
| func (m MyString) String() string {
 | ||
|     return fmt.Sprintf("MyString=%s", string(m)) // OK: note conversion.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In the <a href="#initialization">initialization section</a> we'll see another technique that avoids this recursion.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Another printing technique is to pass a print routine's arguments directly to another such routine.
 | ||
| The signature of <code>Printf</code> uses the type <code>...interface{}</code>
 | ||
| for its final argument to specify that an arbitrary number of parameters (of arbitrary type)
 | ||
| can appear after the format.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Printf(format string, v ...interface{}) (n int, err error) {
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Within the function <code>Printf</code>, <code>v</code> acts like a variable of type
 | ||
| <code>[]interface{}</code> but if it is passed to another variadic function, it acts like
 | ||
| a regular list of arguments.
 | ||
| Here is the implementation of the
 | ||
| function <code>log.Println</code> we used above. It passes its arguments directly to
 | ||
| <code>fmt.Sprintln</code> for the actual formatting.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Println prints to the standard logger in the manner of fmt.Println.
 | ||
| func Println(v ...interface{}) {
 | ||
|     std.Output(2, fmt.Sprintln(v...))  // Output takes parameters (int, string)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| We write <code>...</code> after <code>v</code> in the nested call to <code>Sprintln</code> to tell the
 | ||
| compiler to treat <code>v</code> as a list of arguments; otherwise it would just pass
 | ||
| <code>v</code> as a single slice argument.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There's even more to printing than we've covered here.  See the <code>godoc</code> documentation
 | ||
| for package <code>fmt</code> for the details.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By the way, a <code>...</code> parameter can be of a specific type, for instance <code>...int</code>
 | ||
| for a min function that chooses the least of a list of integers:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Min(a ...int) int {
 | ||
|     min := int(^uint(0) >> 1)  // largest int
 | ||
|     for _, i := range a {
 | ||
|         if i < min {
 | ||
|             min = i
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return min
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="append">Append</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Now we have the missing piece we needed to explain the design of
 | ||
| the <code>append</code> built-in function.  The signature of <code>append</code>
 | ||
| is different from our custom <code>Append</code> function above.
 | ||
| Schematically, it's like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func append(slice []<i>T</i>, elements ...<i>T</i>) []<i>T</i>
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| where <i>T</i> is a placeholder for any given type.  You can't
 | ||
| actually write a function in Go where the type <code>T</code>
 | ||
| is determined by the caller.
 | ||
| That's why <code>append</code> is built in: it needs support from the
 | ||
| compiler.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| What <code>append</code> does is append the elements to the end of
 | ||
| the slice and return the result.  The result needs to be returned
 | ||
| because, as with our hand-written <code>Append</code>, the underlying
 | ||
| array may change.  This simple example
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| x := []int{1,2,3}
 | ||
| x = append(x, 4, 5, 6)
 | ||
| fmt.Println(x)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| prints <code>[1 2 3 4 5 6]</code>.  So <code>append</code> works a
 | ||
| little like <code>Printf</code>, collecting an arbitrary number of
 | ||
| arguments.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| But what if we wanted to do what our <code>Append</code> does and
 | ||
| append a slice to a slice?  Easy: use <code>...</code> at the call
 | ||
| site, just as we did in the call to <code>Output</code> above.  This
 | ||
| snippet produces identical output to the one above.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| x := []int{1,2,3}
 | ||
| y := []int{4,5,6}
 | ||
| x = append(x, y...)
 | ||
| fmt.Println(x)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Without that <code>...</code>, it wouldn't compile because the types
 | ||
| would be wrong; <code>y</code> is not of type <code>int</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="initialization">Initialization</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Although it doesn't look superficially very different from
 | ||
| initialization in C or C++, initialization in Go is more powerful.
 | ||
| Complex structures can be built during initialization and the ordering
 | ||
| issues among initialized objects, even among different packages, are handled
 | ||
| correctly.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="constants">Constants</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Constants in Go are just that—constant.
 | ||
| They are created at compile time, even when defined as
 | ||
| locals in functions,
 | ||
| and can only be numbers, characters (runes), strings or booleans.
 | ||
| Because of the compile-time restriction, the expressions
 | ||
| that define them must be constant expressions,
 | ||
| evaluatable by the compiler.  For instance,
 | ||
| <code>1<<3</code> is a constant expression, while
 | ||
| <code>math.Sin(math.Pi/4)</code> is not because
 | ||
| the function call to <code>math.Sin</code> needs
 | ||
| to happen at run time.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In Go, enumerated constants are created using the <code>iota</code>
 | ||
| enumerator.  Since <code>iota</code> can be part of an expression and
 | ||
| expressions can be implicitly repeated, it is easy to build intricate
 | ||
| sets of values.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| {{code "/doc/progs/eff_bytesize.go" `/^type ByteSize/` `/^\)/`}}
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The ability to attach a method such as <code>String</code> to any
 | ||
| user-defined type makes it possible for arbitrary values to format themselves
 | ||
| automatically for printing.
 | ||
| Although you'll see it most often applied to structs, this technique is also useful for
 | ||
| scalar types such as floating-point types like <code>ByteSize</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| {{code "/doc/progs/eff_bytesize.go" `/^func.*ByteSize.*String/` `/^}/`}}
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The expression <code>YB</code> prints as <code>1.00YB</code>,
 | ||
| while <code>ByteSize(1e13)</code> prints as <code>9.09TB</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The use here of <code>Sprintf</code>
 | ||
| to implement <code>ByteSize</code>'s <code>String</code> method is safe
 | ||
| (avoids recurring indefinitely) not because of a conversion but
 | ||
| because it calls <code>Sprintf</code> with <code>%f</code>,
 | ||
| which is not a string format: <code>Sprintf</code> will only call
 | ||
| the <code>String</code> method when it wants a string, and <code>%f</code>
 | ||
| wants a floating-point value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="variables">Variables</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Variables can be initialized just like constants but the
 | ||
| initializer can be a general expression computed at run time.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var (
 | ||
|     home   = os.Getenv("HOME")
 | ||
|     user   = os.Getenv("USER")
 | ||
|     gopath = os.Getenv("GOPATH")
 | ||
| )
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="init">The init function</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Finally, each source file can define its own niladic <code>init</code> function to
 | ||
| set up whatever state is required.  (Actually each file can have multiple
 | ||
| <code>init</code> functions.)
 | ||
| And finally means finally: <code>init</code> is called after all the
 | ||
| variable declarations in the package have evaluated their initializers,
 | ||
| and those are evaluated only after all the imported packages have been
 | ||
| initialized.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Besides initializations that cannot be expressed as declarations,
 | ||
| a common use of <code>init</code> functions is to verify or repair
 | ||
| correctness of the program state before real execution begins.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func init() {
 | ||
|     if user == "" {
 | ||
|         log.Fatal("$USER not set")
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     if home == "" {
 | ||
|         home = "/home/" + user
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     if gopath == "" {
 | ||
|         gopath = home + "/go"
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     // gopath may be overridden by --gopath flag on command line.
 | ||
|     flag.StringVar(&gopath, "gopath", gopath, "override default GOPATH")
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="methods">Methods</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="pointers_vs_values">Pointers vs. Values</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| As we saw with <code>ByteSize</code>,
 | ||
| methods can be defined for any named type (except a pointer or an interface);
 | ||
| the receiver does not have to be a struct.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In the discussion of slices above, we wrote an <code>Append</code>
 | ||
| function.  We can define it as a method on slices instead.  To do
 | ||
| this, we first declare a named type to which we can bind the method, and
 | ||
| then make the receiver for the method a value of that type.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type ByteSlice []byte
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (slice ByteSlice) Append(data []byte) []byte {
 | ||
|     // Body exactly the same as the Append function defined above.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This still requires the method to return the updated slice.  We can
 | ||
| eliminate that clumsiness by redefining the method to take a
 | ||
| <i>pointer</i> to a <code>ByteSlice</code> as its receiver, so the
 | ||
| method can overwrite the caller's slice.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (p *ByteSlice) Append(data []byte) {
 | ||
|     slice := *p
 | ||
|     // Body as above, without the return.
 | ||
|     *p = slice
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In fact, we can do even better.  If we modify our function so it looks
 | ||
| like a standard <code>Write</code> method, like this,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (p *ByteSlice) Write(data []byte) (n int, err error) {
 | ||
|     slice := *p
 | ||
|     // Again as above.
 | ||
|     *p = slice
 | ||
|     return len(data), nil
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| then the type <code>*ByteSlice</code> satisfies the standard interface
 | ||
| <code>io.Writer</code>, which is handy.  For instance, we can
 | ||
| print into one.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
|     var b ByteSlice
 | ||
|     fmt.Fprintf(&b, "This hour has %d days\n", 7)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| We pass the address of a <code>ByteSlice</code>
 | ||
| because only <code>*ByteSlice</code> satisfies <code>io.Writer</code>.
 | ||
| The rule about pointers vs. values for receivers is that value methods
 | ||
| can be invoked on pointers and values, but pointer methods can only be
 | ||
| invoked on pointers.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This rule arises because pointer methods can modify the receiver; invoking
 | ||
| them on a value would cause the method to receive a copy of the value, so
 | ||
| any modifications would be discarded.
 | ||
| The language therefore disallows this mistake.
 | ||
| There is a handy exception, though. When the value is addressable, the
 | ||
| language takes care of the common case of invoking a pointer method on a
 | ||
| value by inserting the address operator automatically.
 | ||
| In our example, the variable <code>b</code> is addressable, so we can call
 | ||
| its <code>Write</code> method with just <code>b.Write</code>. The compiler
 | ||
| will rewrite that to <code>(&b).Write</code> for us.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By the way, the idea of using <code>Write</code> on a slice of bytes
 | ||
| is central to the implementation of <code>bytes.Buffer</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="interfaces_and_types">Interfaces and other types</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="interfaces">Interfaces</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Interfaces in Go provide a way to specify the behavior of an
 | ||
| object: if something can do <em>this</em>, then it can be used
 | ||
| <em>here</em>.  We've seen a couple of simple examples already;
 | ||
| custom printers can be implemented by a <code>String</code> method
 | ||
| while <code>Fprintf</code> can generate output to anything
 | ||
| with a <code>Write</code> method.
 | ||
| Interfaces with only one or two methods are common in Go code, and are
 | ||
| usually given a name derived from the method, such as <code>io.Writer</code>
 | ||
| for something that implements <code>Write</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A type can implement multiple interfaces.
 | ||
| For instance, a collection can be sorted
 | ||
| by the routines in package <code>sort</code> if it implements
 | ||
| <code>sort.Interface</code>, which contains <code>Len()</code>,
 | ||
| <code>Less(i, j int) bool</code>, and <code>Swap(i, j int)</code>,
 | ||
| and it could also have a custom formatter.
 | ||
| In this contrived example <code>Sequence</code> satisfies both.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| {{code "/doc/progs/eff_sequence.go" `/^type/` "$"}}
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="conversions">Conversions</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The <code>String</code> method of <code>Sequence</code> is recreating the
 | ||
| work that <code>Sprint</code> already does for slices.  We can share the
 | ||
| effort if we convert the <code>Sequence</code> to a plain
 | ||
| <code>[]int</code> before calling <code>Sprint</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (s Sequence) String() string {
 | ||
|     sort.Sort(s)
 | ||
|     return fmt.Sprint([]int(s))
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This method is another example of the conversion technique for calling
 | ||
| <code>Sprintf</code> safely from a <code>String</code> method.
 | ||
| Because the two types (<code>Sequence</code> and <code>[]int</code>)
 | ||
| are the same if we ignore the type name, it's legal to convert between them.
 | ||
| The conversion doesn't create a new value, it just temporarily acts
 | ||
| as though the existing value has a new type.
 | ||
| (There are other legal conversions, such as from integer to floating point, that
 | ||
| do create a new value.)
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| It's an idiom in Go programs to convert the
 | ||
| type of an expression to access a different
 | ||
| set of methods. As an example, we could use the existing
 | ||
| type <code>sort.IntSlice</code> to reduce the entire example
 | ||
| to this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Sequence []int
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Method for printing - sorts the elements before printing
 | ||
| func (s Sequence) String() string {
 | ||
|     sort.IntSlice(s).Sort()
 | ||
|     return fmt.Sprint([]int(s))
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Now, instead of having <code>Sequence</code> implement multiple
 | ||
| interfaces (sorting and printing), we're using the ability of a data item to be
 | ||
| converted to multiple types (<code>Sequence</code>, <code>sort.IntSlice</code>
 | ||
| and <code>[]int</code>), each of which does some part of the job.
 | ||
| That's more unusual in practice but can be effective.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="interface_conversions">Interface conversions and type assertions</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <a href="#type_switch">Type switches</a> are a form of conversion: they take an interface and, for
 | ||
| each case in the switch, in a sense convert it to the type of that case.
 | ||
| Here's a simplified version of how the code under <code>fmt.Printf</code> turns a value into
 | ||
| a string using a type switch.
 | ||
| If it's already a string, we want the actual string value held by the interface, while if it has a
 | ||
| <code>String</code> method we want the result of calling the method.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Stringer interface {
 | ||
|     String() string
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| var value interface{} // Value provided by caller.
 | ||
| switch str := value.(type) {
 | ||
| case string:
 | ||
|     return str
 | ||
| case Stringer:
 | ||
|     return str.String()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The first case finds a concrete value; the second converts the interface into another interface.
 | ||
| It's perfectly fine to mix types this way.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| What if there's only one type we care about? If we know the value holds a <code>string</code>
 | ||
| and we just want to extract it?
 | ||
| A one-case type switch would do, but so would a <em>type assertion</em>.
 | ||
| A type assertion takes an interface value and extracts from it a value of the specified explicit type.
 | ||
| The syntax borrows from the clause opening a type switch, but with an explicit
 | ||
| type rather than the <code>type</code> keyword:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| value.(typeName)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| and the result is a new value with the static type <code>typeName</code>.
 | ||
| That type must either be the concrete type held by the interface, or a second interface
 | ||
| type that the value can be converted to.
 | ||
| To extract the string we know is in the value, we could write:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| str := value.(string)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| But if it turns out that the value does not contain a string, the program will crash with a run-time error.
 | ||
| To guard against that, use the "comma, ok" idiom to test, safely, whether the value is a string:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| str, ok := value.(string)
 | ||
| if ok {
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("string value is: %q\n", str)
 | ||
| } else {
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("value is not a string\n")
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If the type assertion fails, <code>str</code> will still exist and be of type string, but it will have
 | ||
| the zero value, an empty string.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| As an illustration of the capability, here's an <code>if</code>-<code>else</code>
 | ||
| statement that's equivalent to the type switch that opened this section.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if str, ok := value.(string); ok {
 | ||
|     return str
 | ||
| } else if str, ok := value.(Stringer); ok {
 | ||
|     return str.String()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="generality">Generality</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If a type exists only to implement an interface and will
 | ||
| never have exported methods beyond that interface, there is
 | ||
| no need to export the type itself.
 | ||
| Exporting just the interface makes it clear the value has no
 | ||
| interesting behavior beyond what is described in the
 | ||
| interface.
 | ||
| It also avoids the need to repeat the documentation
 | ||
| on every instance of a common method.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In such cases, the constructor should return an interface value
 | ||
| rather than the implementing type.
 | ||
| As an example, in the hash libraries
 | ||
| both <code>crc32.NewIEEE</code> and <code>adler32.New</code>
 | ||
| return the interface type <code>hash.Hash32</code>.
 | ||
| Substituting the CRC-32 algorithm for Adler-32 in a Go program
 | ||
| requires only changing the constructor call;
 | ||
| the rest of the code is unaffected by the change of algorithm.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A similar approach allows the streaming cipher algorithms
 | ||
| in the various <code>crypto</code> packages to be
 | ||
| separated from the block ciphers they chain together.
 | ||
| The <code>Block</code> interface
 | ||
| in the <code>crypto/cipher</code> package specifies the
 | ||
| behavior of a block cipher, which provides encryption
 | ||
| of a single block of data.
 | ||
| Then, by analogy with the <code>bufio</code> package,
 | ||
| cipher packages that implement this interface
 | ||
| can be used to construct streaming ciphers, represented
 | ||
| by the <code>Stream</code> interface, without
 | ||
| knowing the details of the block encryption.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The  <code>crypto/cipher</code> interfaces look like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Block interface {
 | ||
|     BlockSize() int
 | ||
|     Encrypt(src, dst []byte)
 | ||
|     Decrypt(src, dst []byte)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| type Stream interface {
 | ||
|     XORKeyStream(dst, src []byte)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Here's the definition of the counter mode (CTR) stream,
 | ||
| which turns a block cipher into a streaming cipher; notice
 | ||
| that the block cipher's details are abstracted away:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // NewCTR returns a Stream that encrypts/decrypts using the given Block in
 | ||
| // counter mode. The length of iv must be the same as the Block's block size.
 | ||
| func NewCTR(block Block, iv []byte) Stream
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>NewCTR</code> applies not
 | ||
| just to one specific encryption algorithm and data source but to any
 | ||
| implementation of the <code>Block</code> interface and any
 | ||
| <code>Stream</code>.  Because they return
 | ||
| interface values, replacing CTR
 | ||
| encryption with other encryption modes is a localized change.  The constructor
 | ||
| calls must be edited, but because the surrounding code must treat the result only
 | ||
| as a <code>Stream</code>, it won't notice the difference.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="interface_methods">Interfaces and methods</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Since almost anything can have methods attached, almost anything can
 | ||
| satisfy an interface.  One illustrative example is in the <code>http</code>
 | ||
| package, which defines the <code>Handler</code> interface.  Any object
 | ||
| that implements <code>Handler</code> can serve HTTP requests.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Handler interface {
 | ||
|     ServeHTTP(ResponseWriter, *Request)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>ResponseWriter</code> is itself an interface that provides access
 | ||
| to the methods needed to return the response to the client.
 | ||
| Those methods include the standard <code>Write</code> method, so an
 | ||
| <code>http.ResponseWriter</code> can be used wherever an <code>io.Writer</code>
 | ||
| can be used.
 | ||
| <code>Request</code> is a struct containing a parsed representation
 | ||
| of the request from the client.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| For brevity, let's ignore POSTs and assume HTTP requests are always
 | ||
| GETs; that simplification does not affect the way the handlers are
 | ||
| set up.  Here's a trivial but complete implementation of a handler to
 | ||
| count the number of times the
 | ||
| page is visited.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Simple counter server.
 | ||
| type Counter struct {
 | ||
|     n int
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (ctr *Counter) ServeHTTP(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) {
 | ||
|     ctr.n++
 | ||
|     fmt.Fprintf(w, "counter = %d\n", ctr.n)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| (Keeping with our theme, note how <code>Fprintf</code> can print to an
 | ||
| <code>http.ResponseWriter</code>.)
 | ||
| For reference, here's how to attach such a server to a node on the URL tree.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| import "net/http"
 | ||
| ...
 | ||
| ctr := new(Counter)
 | ||
| http.Handle("/counter", ctr)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| But why make <code>Counter</code> a struct?  An integer is all that's needed.
 | ||
| (The receiver needs to be a pointer so the increment is visible to the caller.)
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Simpler counter server.
 | ||
| type Counter int
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (ctr *Counter) ServeHTTP(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) {
 | ||
|     *ctr++
 | ||
|     fmt.Fprintf(w, "counter = %d\n", *ctr)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| What if your program has some internal state that needs to be notified that a page
 | ||
| has been visited?  Tie a channel to the web page.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // A channel that sends a notification on each visit.
 | ||
| // (Probably want the channel to be buffered.)
 | ||
| type Chan chan *http.Request
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (ch Chan) ServeHTTP(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) {
 | ||
|     ch <- req
 | ||
|     fmt.Fprint(w, "notification sent")
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Finally, let's say we wanted to present on <code>/args</code> the arguments
 | ||
| used when invoking the server binary.
 | ||
| It's easy to write a function to print the arguments.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func ArgServer() {
 | ||
|     fmt.Println(os.Args)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| How do we turn that into an HTTP server?  We could make <code>ArgServer</code>
 | ||
| a method of some type whose value we ignore, but there's a cleaner way.
 | ||
| Since we can define a method for any type except pointers and interfaces,
 | ||
| we can write a method for a function.
 | ||
| The <code>http</code> package contains this code:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // The HandlerFunc type is an adapter to allow the use of
 | ||
| // ordinary functions as HTTP handlers.  If f is a function
 | ||
| // with the appropriate signature, HandlerFunc(f) is a
 | ||
| // Handler object that calls f.
 | ||
| type HandlerFunc func(ResponseWriter, *Request)
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // ServeHTTP calls f(w, req).
 | ||
| func (f HandlerFunc) ServeHTTP(w ResponseWriter, req *Request) {
 | ||
|     f(w, req)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>HandlerFunc</code> is a type with a method, <code>ServeHTTP</code>,
 | ||
| so values of that type can serve HTTP requests.  Look at the implementation
 | ||
| of the method: the receiver is a function, <code>f</code>, and the method
 | ||
| calls <code>f</code>.  That may seem odd but it's not that different from, say,
 | ||
| the receiver being a channel and the method sending on the channel.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| To make <code>ArgServer</code> into an HTTP server, we first modify it
 | ||
| to have the right signature.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Argument server.
 | ||
| func ArgServer(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) {
 | ||
|     fmt.Fprintln(w, os.Args)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>ArgServer</code> now has same signature as <code>HandlerFunc</code>,
 | ||
| so it can be converted to that type to access its methods,
 | ||
| just as we converted <code>Sequence</code> to <code>IntSlice</code>
 | ||
| to access <code>IntSlice.Sort</code>.
 | ||
| The code to set it up is concise:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| http.Handle("/args", http.HandlerFunc(ArgServer))
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| When someone visits the page <code>/args</code>,
 | ||
| the handler installed at that page has value <code>ArgServer</code>
 | ||
| and type <code>HandlerFunc</code>.
 | ||
| The HTTP server will invoke the method <code>ServeHTTP</code>
 | ||
| of that type, with <code>ArgServer</code> as the receiver, which will in turn call
 | ||
| <code>ArgServer</code> (via the invocation <code>f(w, req)</code>
 | ||
| inside <code>HandlerFunc.ServeHTTP</code>).
 | ||
| The arguments will then be displayed.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In this section we have made an HTTP server from a struct, an integer,
 | ||
| a channel, and a function, all because interfaces are just sets of
 | ||
| methods, which can be defined for (almost) any type.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="blank">The blank identifier</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| We've mentioned the blank identifier a couple of times now, in the context of
 | ||
| <a href="#for"><code>for</code> <code>range</code> loops</a>
 | ||
| and <a href="#maps">maps</a>.
 | ||
| The blank identifier can be assigned or declared with any value of any type, with the
 | ||
| value discarded harmlessly.
 | ||
| It's a bit like writing to the Unix <code>/dev/null</code> file:
 | ||
| it represents a write-only value
 | ||
| to be used as a place-holder
 | ||
| where a variable is needed but the actual value is irrelevant.
 | ||
| It has uses beyond those we've seen already.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="blank_assign">The blank identifier in multiple assignment</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The use of a blank identifier in a <code>for</code> <code>range</code> loop is a
 | ||
| special case of a general situation: multiple assignment.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If an assignment requires multiple values on the left side,
 | ||
| but one of the values will not be used by the program,
 | ||
| a blank identifier on the left-hand-side of
 | ||
| the assignment avoids the need
 | ||
| to create a dummy variable and makes it clear that the
 | ||
| value is to be discarded.
 | ||
| For instance, when calling a function that returns
 | ||
| a value and an error, but only the error is important,
 | ||
| use the blank identifier to discard the irrelevant value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if _, err := os.Stat(path); os.IsNotExist(err) {
 | ||
| 	fmt.Printf("%s does not exist\n", path)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Occasionally you'll see code that discards the error value in order
 | ||
| to ignore the error; this is terrible practice. Always check error returns;
 | ||
| they're provided for a reason.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Bad! This code will crash if path does not exist.
 | ||
| fi, _ := os.Stat(path)
 | ||
| if fi.IsDir() {
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("%s is a directory\n", path)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="blank_unused">Unused imports and variables</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| It is an error to import a package or to declare a variable without using it.
 | ||
| Unused imports bloat the program and slow compilation,
 | ||
| while a variable that is initialized but not used is at least
 | ||
| a wasted computation and perhaps indicative of a
 | ||
| larger bug.
 | ||
| When a program is under active development, however,
 | ||
| unused imports and variables often arise and it can
 | ||
| be annoying to delete them just to have the compilation proceed,
 | ||
| only to have them be needed again later.
 | ||
| The blank identifier provides a workaround.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This half-written program has two unused imports
 | ||
| (<code>fmt</code> and <code>io</code>)
 | ||
| and an unused variable (<code>fd</code>),
 | ||
| so it will not compile, but it would be nice to see if the
 | ||
| code so far is correct.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| {{code "/doc/progs/eff_unused1.go" `/package/` `$`}}
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| To silence complaints about the unused imports, use a
 | ||
| blank identifier to refer to a symbol from the imported package.
 | ||
| Similarly, assigning the unused variable <code>fd</code>
 | ||
| to the blank identifier will silence the unused variable error.
 | ||
| This version of the program does compile.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| {{code "/doc/progs/eff_unused2.go" `/package/` `$`}}
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By convention, the global declarations to silence import errors
 | ||
| should come right after the imports and be commented,
 | ||
| both to make them easy to find and as a reminder to clean things up later.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="blank_import">Import for side effect</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| An unused import like <code>fmt</code> or <code>io</code> in the
 | ||
| previous example should eventually be used or removed:
 | ||
| blank assignments identify code as a work in progress.
 | ||
| But sometimes it is useful to import a package only for its
 | ||
| side effects, without any explicit use.
 | ||
| For example, during its <code>init</code> function,
 | ||
| the <code><a href="/pkg/net/http/pprof/">net/http/pprof</a></code>
 | ||
| package registers HTTP handlers that provide
 | ||
| debugging information. It has an exported API, but
 | ||
| most clients need only the handler registration and
 | ||
| access the data through a web page.
 | ||
| To import the package only for its side effects, rename the package
 | ||
| to the blank identifier:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| import _ "net/http/pprof"
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This form of import makes clear that the package is being
 | ||
| imported for its side effects, because there is no other possible
 | ||
| use of the package: in this file, it doesn't have a name.
 | ||
| (If it did, and we didn't use that name, the compiler would reject the program.)
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="blank_implements">Interface checks</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| As we saw in the discussion of <a href="#interfaces_and_types">interfaces</a> above,
 | ||
| a type need not declare explicitly that it implements an interface.
 | ||
| Instead, a type implements the interface just by implementing the interface's methods.
 | ||
| In practice, most interface conversions are static and therefore checked at compile time.
 | ||
| For example, passing an <code>*os.File</code> to a function
 | ||
| expecting an <code>io.Reader</code> will not compile unless
 | ||
| <code>*os.File</code> implements the <code>io.Reader</code> interface.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Some interface checks do happen at run-time, though.
 | ||
| One instance is in the <code><a href="/pkg/encoding/json/">encoding/json</a></code>
 | ||
| package, which defines a <code><a href="/pkg/encoding/json/#Marshaler">Marshaler</a></code>
 | ||
| interface. When the JSON encoder receives a value that implements that interface,
 | ||
| the encoder invokes the value's marshaling method to convert it to JSON
 | ||
| instead of doing the standard conversion.
 | ||
| The encoder checks this property at run time with a <a href="#interface_conversions">type assertion</a> like:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| m, ok := val.(json.Marshaler)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If it's necessary only to ask whether a type implements an interface, without
 | ||
| actually using the interface itself, perhaps as part of an error check, use the blank
 | ||
| identifier to ignore the type-asserted value:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if _, ok := val.(json.Marshaler); ok {
 | ||
|     fmt.Printf("value %v of type %T implements json.Marshaler\n", val, val)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| One place this situation arises is when it is necessary to guarantee within the package implementing the type that
 | ||
| it actually satisfies the interface.
 | ||
| If a type—for example,
 | ||
| <code><a href="/pkg/encoding/json/#RawMessage">json.RawMessage</a></code>—needs
 | ||
| a custom JSON representation, it should implement
 | ||
| <code>json.Marshaler</code>, but there are no static conversions that would
 | ||
| cause the compiler to verify this automatically.
 | ||
| If the type inadvertently fails to satisfy the interface, the JSON encoder will still work,
 | ||
| but will not use the custom implementation.
 | ||
| To guarantee that the implementation is correct,
 | ||
| a global declaration using the blank identifier can be used in the package:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var _ json.Marshaler = (*RawMessage)(nil)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In this declaration, the assignment involving a conversion of a
 | ||
| <code>*RawMessage</code> to a <code>Marshaler</code>
 | ||
| requires that <code>*RawMessage</code> implements <code>Marshaler</code>,
 | ||
| and that property will be checked at compile time.
 | ||
| Should the <code>json.Marshaler</code> interface change, this package
 | ||
| will no longer compile and we will be on notice that it needs to be updated.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The appearance of the blank identifier in this construct indicates that
 | ||
| the declaration exists only for the type checking,
 | ||
| not to create a variable.
 | ||
| Don't do this for every type that satisfies an interface, though.
 | ||
| By convention, such declarations are only used
 | ||
| when there are no static conversions already present in the code,
 | ||
| which is a rare event.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="embedding">Embedding</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Go does not provide the typical, type-driven notion of subclassing,
 | ||
| but it does have the ability to “borrow” pieces of an
 | ||
| implementation by <em>embedding</em> types within a struct or
 | ||
| interface.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Interface embedding is very simple.
 | ||
| We've mentioned the <code>io.Reader</code> and <code>io.Writer</code> interfaces before;
 | ||
| here are their definitions.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Reader interface {
 | ||
|     Read(p []byte) (n int, err error)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| type Writer interface {
 | ||
|     Write(p []byte) (n int, err error)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The <code>io</code> package also exports several other interfaces
 | ||
| that specify objects that can implement several such methods.
 | ||
| For instance, there is <code>io.ReadWriter</code>, an interface
 | ||
| containing both <code>Read</code> and <code>Write</code>.
 | ||
| We could specify <code>io.ReadWriter</code> by listing the
 | ||
| two methods explicitly, but it's easier and more evocative
 | ||
| to embed the two interfaces to form the new one, like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // ReadWriter is the interface that combines the Reader and Writer interfaces.
 | ||
| type ReadWriter interface {
 | ||
|     Reader
 | ||
|     Writer
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This says just what it looks like: A <code>ReadWriter</code> can do
 | ||
| what a <code>Reader</code> does <em>and</em> what a <code>Writer</code>
 | ||
| does; it is a union of the embedded interfaces (which must be disjoint
 | ||
| sets of methods).
 | ||
| Only interfaces can be embedded within interfaces.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The same basic idea applies to structs, but with more far-reaching
 | ||
| implications.  The <code>bufio</code> package has two struct types,
 | ||
| <code>bufio.Reader</code> and <code>bufio.Writer</code>, each of
 | ||
| which of course implements the analogous interfaces from package
 | ||
| <code>io</code>.
 | ||
| And <code>bufio</code> also implements a buffered reader/writer,
 | ||
| which it does by combining a reader and a writer into one struct
 | ||
| using embedding: it lists the types within the struct
 | ||
| but does not give them field names.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // ReadWriter stores pointers to a Reader and a Writer.
 | ||
| // It implements io.ReadWriter.
 | ||
| type ReadWriter struct {
 | ||
|     *Reader  // *bufio.Reader
 | ||
|     *Writer  // *bufio.Writer
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The embedded elements are pointers to structs and of course
 | ||
| must be initialized to point to valid structs before they
 | ||
| can be used.
 | ||
| The <code>ReadWriter</code> struct could be written as
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type ReadWriter struct {
 | ||
|     reader *Reader
 | ||
|     writer *Writer
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| but then to promote the methods of the fields and to
 | ||
| satisfy the <code>io</code> interfaces, we would also need
 | ||
| to provide forwarding methods, like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (rw *ReadWriter) Read(p []byte) (n int, err error) {
 | ||
|     return rw.reader.Read(p)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By embedding the structs directly, we avoid this bookkeeping.
 | ||
| The methods of embedded types come along for free, which means that <code>bufio.ReadWriter</code>
 | ||
| not only has the methods of <code>bufio.Reader</code> and <code>bufio.Writer</code>,
 | ||
| it also satisfies all three interfaces:
 | ||
| <code>io.Reader</code>,
 | ||
| <code>io.Writer</code>, and
 | ||
| <code>io.ReadWriter</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There's an important way in which embedding differs from subclassing.  When we embed a type,
 | ||
| the methods of that type become methods of the outer type,
 | ||
| but when they are invoked the receiver of the method is the inner type, not the outer one.
 | ||
| In our example, when the <code>Read</code> method of a <code>bufio.ReadWriter</code> is
 | ||
| invoked, it has exactly the same effect as the forwarding method written out above;
 | ||
| the receiver is the <code>reader</code> field of the <code>ReadWriter</code>, not the
 | ||
| <code>ReadWriter</code> itself.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Embedding can also be a simple convenience.
 | ||
| This example shows an embedded field alongside a regular, named field.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Job struct {
 | ||
|     Command string
 | ||
|     *log.Logger
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The <code>Job</code> type now has the <code>Log</code>, <code>Logf</code>
 | ||
| and other
 | ||
| methods of <code>*log.Logger</code>.  We could have given the <code>Logger</code>
 | ||
| a field name, of course, but it's not necessary to do so.  And now, once
 | ||
| initialized, we can
 | ||
| log to the <code>Job</code>:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| job.Log("starting now...")
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The <code>Logger</code> is a regular field of the <code>Job</code> struct,
 | ||
| so we can initialize it in the usual way inside the constructor for <code>Job</code>, like this,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func NewJob(command string, logger *log.Logger) *Job {
 | ||
|     return &Job{command, logger}
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| or with a composite literal,
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| job := &Job{command, log.New(os.Stderr, "Job: ", log.Ldate)}
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If we need to refer to an embedded field directly, the type name of the field,
 | ||
| ignoring the package qualifier, serves as a field name, as it did
 | ||
| in the <code>Read</code> method of our <code>ReadWriter</code> struct.
 | ||
| Here, if we needed to access the
 | ||
| <code>*log.Logger</code> of a <code>Job</code> variable <code>job</code>,
 | ||
| we would write <code>job.Logger</code>,
 | ||
| which would be useful if we wanted to refine the methods of <code>Logger</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func (job *Job) Logf(format string, args ...interface{}) {
 | ||
|     job.Logger.Logf("%q: %s", job.Command, fmt.Sprintf(format, args...))
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Embedding types introduces the problem of name conflicts but the rules to resolve
 | ||
| them are simple.
 | ||
| First, a field or method <code>X</code> hides any other item <code>X</code> in a more deeply
 | ||
| nested part of the type.
 | ||
| If <code>log.Logger</code> contained a field or method called <code>Command</code>, the <code>Command</code> field
 | ||
| of <code>Job</code> would dominate it.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Second, if the same name appears at the same nesting level, it is usually an error;
 | ||
| it would be erroneous to embed <code>log.Logger</code> if the <code>Job</code> struct
 | ||
| contained another field or method called <code>Logger</code>.
 | ||
| However, if the duplicate name is never mentioned in the program outside the type definition, it is OK.
 | ||
| This qualification provides some protection against changes made to types embedded from outside; there
 | ||
| is no problem if a field is added that conflicts with another field in another subtype if neither field
 | ||
| is ever used.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="concurrency">Concurrency</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="sharing">Share by communicating</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Concurrent programming is a large topic and there is space only for some
 | ||
| Go-specific highlights here.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Concurrent programming in many environments is made difficult by the
 | ||
| subtleties required to implement correct access to shared variables.  Go encourages
 | ||
| a different approach in which shared values are passed around on channels
 | ||
| and, in fact, never actively shared by separate threads of execution.
 | ||
| Only one goroutine has access to the value at any given time.
 | ||
| Data races cannot occur, by design.
 | ||
| To encourage this way of thinking we have reduced it to a slogan:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <blockquote>
 | ||
| Do not communicate by sharing memory;
 | ||
| instead, share memory by communicating.
 | ||
| </blockquote>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This approach can be taken too far.  Reference counts may be best done
 | ||
| by putting a mutex around an integer variable, for instance.  But as a
 | ||
| high-level approach, using channels to control access makes it easier
 | ||
| to write clear, correct programs.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| One way to think about this model is to consider a typical single-threaded
 | ||
| program running on one CPU. It has no need for synchronization primitives.
 | ||
| Now run another such instance; it too needs no synchronization.  Now let those
 | ||
| two communicate; if the communication is the synchronizer, there's still no need
 | ||
| for other synchronization.  Unix pipelines, for example, fit this model
 | ||
| perfectly.  Although Go's approach to concurrency originates in Hoare's
 | ||
| Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP),
 | ||
| it can also be seen as a type-safe generalization of Unix pipes.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="goroutines">Goroutines</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| They're called <em>goroutines</em> because the existing
 | ||
| terms—threads, coroutines, processes, and so on—convey
 | ||
| inaccurate connotations.  A goroutine has a simple model: it is a
 | ||
| function executing concurrently with other goroutines in the same
 | ||
| address space.  It is lightweight, costing little more than the
 | ||
| allocation of stack space.
 | ||
| And the stacks start small, so they are cheap, and grow
 | ||
| by allocating (and freeing) heap storage as required.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Goroutines are multiplexed onto multiple OS threads so if one should
 | ||
| block, such as while waiting for I/O, others continue to run.  Their
 | ||
| design hides many of the complexities of thread creation and
 | ||
| management.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Prefix a function or method call with the <code>go</code>
 | ||
| keyword to run the call in a new goroutine.
 | ||
| When the call completes, the goroutine
 | ||
| exits, silently.  (The effect is similar to the Unix shell's
 | ||
| <code>&</code> notation for running a command in the
 | ||
| background.)
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| go list.Sort()  // run list.Sort concurrently; don't wait for it.
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A function literal can be handy in a goroutine invocation.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Announce(message string, delay time.Duration) {
 | ||
|     go func() {
 | ||
|         time.Sleep(delay)
 | ||
|         fmt.Println(message)
 | ||
|     }()  // Note the parentheses - must call the function.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In Go, function literals are closures: the implementation makes
 | ||
| sure the variables referred to by the function survive as long as they are active.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| These examples aren't too practical because the functions have no way of signaling
 | ||
| completion.  For that, we need channels.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="channels">Channels</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Like maps, channels are allocated with <code>make</code>, and
 | ||
| the resulting value acts as a reference to an underlying data structure.
 | ||
| If an optional integer parameter is provided, it sets the buffer size for the channel.
 | ||
| The default is zero, for an unbuffered or synchronous channel.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| ci := make(chan int)            // unbuffered channel of integers
 | ||
| cj := make(chan int, 0)         // unbuffered channel of integers
 | ||
| cs := make(chan *os.File, 100)  // buffered channel of pointers to Files
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Unbuffered channels combine communication—the exchange of a value—with
 | ||
| synchronization—guaranteeing that two calculations (goroutines) are in
 | ||
| a known state.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There are lots of nice idioms using channels.  Here's one to get us started.
 | ||
| In the previous section we launched a sort in the background. A channel
 | ||
| can allow the launching goroutine to wait for the sort to complete.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| c := make(chan int)  // Allocate a channel.
 | ||
| // Start the sort in a goroutine; when it completes, signal on the channel.
 | ||
| go func() {
 | ||
|     list.Sort()
 | ||
|     c <- 1  // Send a signal; value does not matter.
 | ||
| }()
 | ||
| doSomethingForAWhile()
 | ||
| <-c   // Wait for sort to finish; discard sent value.
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Receivers always block until there is data to receive.
 | ||
| If the channel is unbuffered, the sender blocks until the receiver has
 | ||
| received the value.
 | ||
| If the channel has a buffer, the sender blocks only until the
 | ||
| value has been copied to the buffer; if the buffer is full, this
 | ||
| means waiting until some receiver has retrieved a value.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A buffered channel can be used like a semaphore, for instance to
 | ||
| limit throughput.  In this example, incoming requests are passed
 | ||
| to <code>handle</code>, which sends a value into the channel, processes
 | ||
| the request, and then receives a value from the channel
 | ||
| to ready the “semaphore” for the next consumer.
 | ||
| The capacity of the channel buffer limits the number of
 | ||
| simultaneous calls to <code>process</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var sem = make(chan int, MaxOutstanding)
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func handle(r *Request) {
 | ||
|     sem <- 1    // Wait for active queue to drain.
 | ||
|     process(r)  // May take a long time.
 | ||
|     <-sem       // Done; enable next request to run.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func Serve(queue chan *Request) {
 | ||
|     for {
 | ||
|         req := <-queue
 | ||
|         go handle(req)  // Don't wait for handle to finish.
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Once <code>MaxOutstanding</code> handlers are executing <code>process</code>,
 | ||
| any more will block trying to send into the filled channel buffer,
 | ||
| until one of the existing handlers finishes and receives from the buffer.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This design has a problem, though: <code>Serve</code>
 | ||
| creates a new goroutine for
 | ||
| every incoming request, even though only <code>MaxOutstanding</code>
 | ||
| of them can run at any moment.
 | ||
| As a result, the program can consume unlimited resources if the requests come in too fast.
 | ||
| We can address that deficiency by changing <code>Serve</code> to
 | ||
| gate the creation of the goroutines.
 | ||
| Here's an obvious solution, but beware it has a bug we'll fix subsequently:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Serve(queue chan *Request) {
 | ||
|     for req := range queue {
 | ||
|         sem <- 1
 | ||
|         go func() {
 | ||
|             process(req) // Buggy; see explanation below.
 | ||
|             <-sem
 | ||
|         }()
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }</pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The bug is that in a Go <code>for</code> loop, the loop variable
 | ||
| is reused for each iteration, so the <code>req</code>
 | ||
| variable is shared across all goroutines.
 | ||
| That's not what we want.
 | ||
| We need to make sure that <code>req</code> is unique for each goroutine.
 | ||
| Here's one way to do that, passing the value of <code>req</code> as an argument
 | ||
| to the closure in the goroutine:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Serve(queue chan *Request) {
 | ||
|     for req := range queue {
 | ||
|         sem <- 1
 | ||
|         go func(req *Request) {
 | ||
|             process(req)
 | ||
|             <-sem
 | ||
|         }(req)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }</pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Compare this version with the previous to see the difference in how
 | ||
| the closure is declared and run.
 | ||
| Another solution is just to create a new variable with the same
 | ||
| name, as in this example:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func Serve(queue chan *Request) {
 | ||
|     for req := range queue {
 | ||
|         req := req // Create new instance of req for the goroutine.
 | ||
|         sem <- 1
 | ||
|         go func() {
 | ||
|             process(req)
 | ||
|             <-sem
 | ||
|         }()
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }</pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| It may seem odd to write
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| req := req
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| but it's legal and idiomatic in Go to do this.
 | ||
| You get a fresh version of the variable with the same name, deliberately
 | ||
| shadowing the loop variable locally but unique to each goroutine.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Going back to the general problem of writing the server,
 | ||
| another approach that manages resources well is to start a fixed
 | ||
| number of <code>handle</code> goroutines all reading from the request
 | ||
| channel.
 | ||
| The number of goroutines limits the number of simultaneous
 | ||
| calls to <code>process</code>.
 | ||
| This <code>Serve</code> function also accepts a channel on which
 | ||
| it will be told to exit; after launching the goroutines it blocks
 | ||
| receiving from that channel.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func handle(queue chan *Request) {
 | ||
|     for r := range queue {
 | ||
|         process(r)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func Serve(clientRequests chan *Request, quit chan bool) {
 | ||
|     // Start handlers
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < MaxOutstanding; i++ {
 | ||
|         go handle(clientRequests)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     <-quit  // Wait to be told to exit.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="chan_of_chan">Channels of channels</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| One of the most important properties of Go is that
 | ||
| a channel is a first-class value that can be allocated and passed
 | ||
| around like any other.  A common use of this property is
 | ||
| to implement safe, parallel demultiplexing.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In the example in the previous section, <code>handle</code> was
 | ||
| an idealized handler for a request but we didn't define the
 | ||
| type it was handling.  If that type includes a channel on which
 | ||
| to reply, each client can provide its own path for the answer.
 | ||
| Here's a schematic definition of type <code>Request</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Request struct {
 | ||
|     args        []int
 | ||
|     f           func([]int) int
 | ||
|     resultChan  chan int
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The client provides a function and its arguments, as well as
 | ||
| a channel inside the request object on which to receive the answer.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func sum(a []int) (s int) {
 | ||
|     for _, v := range a {
 | ||
|         s += v
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| request := &Request{[]int{3, 4, 5}, sum, make(chan int)}
 | ||
| // Send request
 | ||
| clientRequests <- request
 | ||
| // Wait for response.
 | ||
| fmt.Printf("answer: %d\n", <-request.resultChan)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| On the server side, the handler function is the only thing that changes.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func handle(queue chan *Request) {
 | ||
|     for req := range queue {
 | ||
|         req.resultChan <- req.f(req.args)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There's clearly a lot more to do to make it realistic, but this
 | ||
| code is a framework for a rate-limited, parallel, non-blocking RPC
 | ||
| system, and there's not a mutex in sight.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="parallel">Parallelization</h3>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Another application of these ideas is to parallelize a calculation
 | ||
| across multiple CPU cores.  If the calculation can be broken into
 | ||
| separate pieces that can execute independently, it can be parallelized,
 | ||
| with a channel to signal when each piece completes.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Let's say we have an expensive operation to perform on a vector of items,
 | ||
| and that the value of the operation on each item is independent,
 | ||
| as in this idealized example.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type Vector []float64
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Apply the operation to v[i], v[i+1] ... up to v[n-1].
 | ||
| func (v Vector) DoSome(i, n int, u Vector, c chan int) {
 | ||
|     for ; i < n; i++ {
 | ||
|         v[i] += u.Op(v[i])
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     c <- 1    // signal that this piece is done
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| We launch the pieces independently in a loop, one per CPU.
 | ||
| They can complete in any order but it doesn't matter; we just
 | ||
| count the completion signals by draining the channel after
 | ||
| launching all the goroutines.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| const numCPU = 4 // number of CPU cores
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (v Vector) DoAll(u Vector) {
 | ||
|     c := make(chan int, numCPU)  // Buffering optional but sensible.
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < numCPU; i++ {
 | ||
|         go v.DoSome(i*len(v)/numCPU, (i+1)*len(v)/numCPU, u, c)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     // Drain the channel.
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < numCPU; i++ {
 | ||
|         <-c    // wait for one task to complete
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     // All done.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Rather than create a constant value for numCPU, we can ask the runtime what
 | ||
| value is appropriate.
 | ||
| The function <code><a href="/pkg/runtime#NumCPU">runtime.NumCPU</a></code>
 | ||
| returns the number of hardware CPU cores in the machine, so we could write
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var numCPU = runtime.NumCPU()
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| There is also a function
 | ||
| <code><a href="/pkg/runtime#GOMAXPROCS">runtime.GOMAXPROCS</a></code>,
 | ||
| which reports (or sets)
 | ||
| the user-specified number of cores that a Go program can have running
 | ||
| simultaneously.
 | ||
| It defaults to the value of <code>runtime.NumCPU</code> but can be
 | ||
| overridden by setting the similarly named shell environment variable
 | ||
| or by calling the function with a positive number.  Calling it with
 | ||
| zero just queries the value.
 | ||
| Therefore if we want to honor the user's resource request, we should write
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var numCPU = runtime.GOMAXPROCS(0)
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Be sure not to confuse the ideas of concurrency—structuring a program
 | ||
| as independently executing components—and parallelism—executing
 | ||
| calculations in parallel for efficiency on multiple CPUs.
 | ||
| Although the concurrency features of Go can make some problems easy
 | ||
| to structure as parallel computations, Go is a concurrent language,
 | ||
| not a parallel one, and not all parallelization problems fit Go's model.
 | ||
| For a discussion of the distinction, see the talk cited in
 | ||
| <a href="//blog.golang.org/2013/01/concurrency-is-not-parallelism.html">this
 | ||
| blog post</a>.
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="leaky_buffer">A leaky buffer</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The tools of concurrent programming can even make non-concurrent
 | ||
| ideas easier to express.  Here's an example abstracted from an RPC
 | ||
| package.  The client goroutine loops receiving data from some source,
 | ||
| perhaps a network.  To avoid allocating and freeing buffers, it keeps
 | ||
| a free list, and uses a buffered channel to represent it.  If the
 | ||
| channel is empty, a new buffer gets allocated.
 | ||
| Once the message buffer is ready, it's sent to the server on
 | ||
| <code>serverChan</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var freeList = make(chan *Buffer, 100)
 | ||
| var serverChan = make(chan *Buffer)
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func client() {
 | ||
|     for {
 | ||
|         var b *Buffer
 | ||
|         // Grab a buffer if available; allocate if not.
 | ||
|         select {
 | ||
|         case b = <-freeList:
 | ||
|             // Got one; nothing more to do.
 | ||
|         default:
 | ||
|             // None free, so allocate a new one.
 | ||
|             b = new(Buffer)
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|         load(b)              // Read next message from the net.
 | ||
|         serverChan <- b      // Send to server.
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The server loop receives each message from the client, processes it,
 | ||
| and returns the buffer to the free list.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func server() {
 | ||
|     for {
 | ||
|         b := <-serverChan    // Wait for work.
 | ||
|         process(b)
 | ||
|         // Reuse buffer if there's room.
 | ||
|         select {
 | ||
|         case freeList <- b:
 | ||
|             // Buffer on free list; nothing more to do.
 | ||
|         default:
 | ||
|             // Free list full, just carry on.
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The client attempts to retrieve a buffer from <code>freeList</code>;
 | ||
| if none is available, it allocates a fresh one.
 | ||
| The server's send to <code>freeList</code> puts <code>b</code> back
 | ||
| on the free list unless the list is full, in which case the
 | ||
| buffer is dropped on the floor to be reclaimed by
 | ||
| the garbage collector.
 | ||
| (The <code>default</code> clauses in the <code>select</code>
 | ||
| statements execute when no other case is ready,
 | ||
| meaning that the <code>selects</code> never block.)
 | ||
| This implementation builds a leaky bucket free list
 | ||
| in just a few lines, relying on the buffered channel and
 | ||
| the garbage collector for bookkeeping.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="errors">Errors</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Library routines must often return some sort of error indication to
 | ||
| the caller.
 | ||
| As mentioned earlier, Go's multivalue return makes it
 | ||
| easy to return a detailed error description alongside the normal
 | ||
| return value.
 | ||
| It is good style to use this feature to provide detailed error information.
 | ||
| For example, as we'll see, <code>os.Open</code> doesn't
 | ||
| just return a <code>nil</code> pointer on failure, it also returns an
 | ||
| error value that describes what went wrong.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By convention, errors have type <code>error</code>,
 | ||
| a simple built-in interface.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| type error interface {
 | ||
|     Error() string
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A library writer is free to implement this interface with a
 | ||
| richer model under the covers, making it possible not only
 | ||
| to see the error but also to provide some context.
 | ||
| As mentioned, alongside the usual <code>*os.File</code>
 | ||
| return value, <code>os.Open</code> also returns an
 | ||
| error value.
 | ||
| If the file is opened successfully, the error will be <code>nil</code>,
 | ||
| but when there is a problem, it will hold an
 | ||
| <code>os.PathError</code>:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // PathError records an error and the operation and
 | ||
| // file path that caused it.
 | ||
| type PathError struct {
 | ||
|     Op string    // "open", "unlink", etc.
 | ||
|     Path string  // The associated file.
 | ||
|     Err error    // Returned by the system call.
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func (e *PathError) Error() string {
 | ||
|     return e.Op + " " + e.Path + ": " + e.Err.Error()
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>PathError</code>'s <code>Error</code> generates
 | ||
| a string like this:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| open /etc/passwx: no such file or directory
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Such an error, which includes the problematic file name, the
 | ||
| operation, and the operating system error it triggered, is useful even
 | ||
| if printed far from the call that caused it;
 | ||
| it is much more informative than the plain
 | ||
| "no such file or directory".
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| When feasible, error strings should identify their origin, such as by having
 | ||
| a prefix naming the operation or package that generated the error.  For example, in package
 | ||
| <code>image</code>, the string representation for a decoding error due to an
 | ||
| unknown format is "image: unknown format".
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Callers that care about the precise error details can
 | ||
| use a type switch or a type assertion to look for specific
 | ||
| errors and extract details.  For <code>PathErrors</code>
 | ||
| this might include examining the internal <code>Err</code>
 | ||
| field for recoverable failures.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| for try := 0; try < 2; try++ {
 | ||
|     file, err = os.Create(filename)
 | ||
|     if err == nil {
 | ||
|         return
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     if e, ok := err.(*os.PathError); ok && e.Err == syscall.ENOSPC {
 | ||
|         deleteTempFiles()  // Recover some space.
 | ||
|         continue
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     return
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The second <code>if</code> statement here is another <a href="#interface_conversions">type assertion</a>.
 | ||
| If it fails, <code>ok</code> will be false, and <code>e</code>
 | ||
| will be <code>nil</code>.
 | ||
| If it succeeds,  <code>ok</code> will be true, which means the
 | ||
| error was of type <code>*os.PathError</code>, and then so is <code>e</code>,
 | ||
| which we can examine for more information about the error.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="panic">Panic</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The usual way to report an error to a caller is to return an
 | ||
| <code>error</code> as an extra return value.  The canonical
 | ||
| <code>Read</code> method is a well-known instance; it returns a byte
 | ||
| count and an <code>error</code>.  But what if the error is
 | ||
| unrecoverable?  Sometimes the program simply cannot continue.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| For this purpose, there is a built-in function <code>panic</code>
 | ||
| that in effect creates a run-time error that will stop the program
 | ||
| (but see the next section).  The function takes a single argument
 | ||
| of arbitrary type—often a string—to be printed as the
 | ||
| program dies.  It's also a way to indicate that something impossible has
 | ||
| happened, such as exiting an infinite loop.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // A toy implementation of cube root using Newton's method.
 | ||
| func CubeRoot(x float64) float64 {
 | ||
|     z := x/3   // Arbitrary initial value
 | ||
|     for i := 0; i < 1e6; i++ {
 | ||
|         prevz := z
 | ||
|         z -= (z*z*z-x) / (3*z*z)
 | ||
|         if veryClose(z, prevz) {
 | ||
|             return z
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
|     // A million iterations has not converged; something is wrong.
 | ||
|     panic(fmt.Sprintf("CubeRoot(%g) did not converge", x))
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| This is only an example but real library functions should
 | ||
| avoid <code>panic</code>.  If the problem can be masked or worked
 | ||
| around, it's always better to let things continue to run rather
 | ||
| than taking down the whole program.  One possible counterexample
 | ||
| is during initialization: if the library truly cannot set itself up,
 | ||
| it might be reasonable to panic, so to speak.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| var user = os.Getenv("USER")
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func init() {
 | ||
|     if user == "" {
 | ||
|         panic("no value for $USER")
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h3 id="recover">Recover</h3>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| When <code>panic</code> is called, including implicitly for run-time
 | ||
| errors such as indexing a slice out of bounds or failing a type
 | ||
| assertion, it immediately stops execution of the current function
 | ||
| and begins unwinding the stack of the goroutine, running any deferred
 | ||
| functions along the way.  If that unwinding reaches the top of the
 | ||
| goroutine's stack, the program dies.  However, it is possible to
 | ||
| use the built-in function <code>recover</code> to regain control
 | ||
| of the goroutine and resume normal execution.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| A call to <code>recover</code> stops the unwinding and returns the
 | ||
| argument passed to <code>panic</code>.  Because the only code that
 | ||
| runs while unwinding is inside deferred functions, <code>recover</code>
 | ||
| is only useful inside deferred functions.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| One application of <code>recover</code> is to shut down a failing goroutine
 | ||
| inside a server without killing the other executing goroutines.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| func server(workChan <-chan *Work) {
 | ||
|     for work := range workChan {
 | ||
|         go safelyDo(work)
 | ||
|     }
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| func safelyDo(work *Work) {
 | ||
|     defer func() {
 | ||
|         if err := recover(); err != nil {
 | ||
|             log.Println("work failed:", err)
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }()
 | ||
|     do(work)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| In this example, if <code>do(work)</code> panics, the result will be
 | ||
| logged and the goroutine will exit cleanly without disturbing the
 | ||
| others.  There's no need to do anything else in the deferred closure;
 | ||
| calling <code>recover</code> handles the condition completely.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Because <code>recover</code> always returns <code>nil</code> unless called directly
 | ||
| from a deferred function, deferred code can call library routines that themselves
 | ||
| use <code>panic</code> and <code>recover</code> without failing.  As an example,
 | ||
| the deferred function in <code>safelyDo</code> might call a logging function before
 | ||
| calling <code>recover</code>, and that logging code would run unaffected
 | ||
| by the panicking state.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| With our recovery pattern in place, the <code>do</code>
 | ||
| function (and anything it calls) can get out of any bad situation
 | ||
| cleanly by calling <code>panic</code>.  We can use that idea to
 | ||
| simplify error handling in complex software.  Let's look at an
 | ||
| idealized version of a <code>regexp</code> package, which reports
 | ||
| parsing errors by calling <code>panic</code> with a local
 | ||
| error type.  Here's the definition of <code>Error</code>,
 | ||
| an <code>error</code> method, and the <code>Compile</code> function.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| // Error is the type of a parse error; it satisfies the error interface.
 | ||
| type Error string
 | ||
| func (e Error) Error() string {
 | ||
|     return string(e)
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // error is a method of *Regexp that reports parsing errors by
 | ||
| // panicking with an Error.
 | ||
| func (regexp *Regexp) error(err string) {
 | ||
|     panic(Error(err))
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Compile returns a parsed representation of the regular expression.
 | ||
| func Compile(str string) (regexp *Regexp, err error) {
 | ||
|     regexp = new(Regexp)
 | ||
|     // doParse will panic if there is a parse error.
 | ||
|     defer func() {
 | ||
|         if e := recover(); e != nil {
 | ||
|             regexp = nil    // Clear return value.
 | ||
|             err = e.(Error) // Will re-panic if not a parse error.
 | ||
|         }
 | ||
|     }()
 | ||
|     return regexp.doParse(str), nil
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| If <code>doParse</code> panics, the recovery block will set the
 | ||
| return value to <code>nil</code>—deferred functions can modify
 | ||
| named return values.  It will then check, in the assignment
 | ||
| to <code>err</code>, that the problem was a parse error by asserting
 | ||
| that it has the local type <code>Error</code>.
 | ||
| If it does not, the type assertion will fail, causing a run-time error
 | ||
| that continues the stack unwinding as though nothing had interrupted
 | ||
| it.
 | ||
| This check means that if something unexpected happens, such
 | ||
| as an index out of bounds, the code will fail even though we
 | ||
| are using <code>panic</code> and <code>recover</code> to handle
 | ||
| parse errors.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| With error handling in place, the <code>error</code> method (because it's a
 | ||
| method bound to a type, it's fine, even natural, for it to have the same name
 | ||
| as the builtin <code>error</code> type)
 | ||
| makes it easy to report parse errors without worrying about unwinding
 | ||
| the parse stack by hand:
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| if pos == 0 {
 | ||
|     re.error("'*' illegal at start of expression")
 | ||
| }
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Useful though this pattern is, it should be used only within a package.
 | ||
| <code>Parse</code> turns its internal <code>panic</code> calls into
 | ||
| <code>error</code> values; it does not expose <code>panics</code>
 | ||
| to its client.  That is a good rule to follow.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| By the way, this re-panic idiom changes the panic value if an actual
 | ||
| error occurs.  However, both the original and new failures will be
 | ||
| presented in the crash report, so the root cause of the problem will
 | ||
| still be visible.  Thus this simple re-panic approach is usually
 | ||
| sufficient—it's a crash after all—but if you want to
 | ||
| display only the original value, you can write a little more code to
 | ||
| filter unexpected problems and re-panic with the original error.
 | ||
| That's left as an exercise for the reader.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <h2 id="web_server">A web server</h2>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Let's finish with a complete Go program, a web server.
 | ||
| This one is actually a kind of web re-server.
 | ||
| Google provides a service at
 | ||
| <a href="http://chart.apis.google.com">http://chart.apis.google.com</a>
 | ||
| that does automatic formatting of data into charts and graphs.
 | ||
| It's hard to use interactively, though,
 | ||
| because you need to put the data into the URL as a query.
 | ||
| The program here provides a nicer interface to one form of data: given a short piece of text,
 | ||
| it calls on the chart server to produce a QR code, a matrix of boxes that encode the
 | ||
| text.
 | ||
| That image can be grabbed with your cell phone's camera and interpreted as,
 | ||
| for instance, a URL, saving you typing the URL into the phone's tiny keyboard.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| Here's the complete program.
 | ||
| An explanation follows.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| {{code "/doc/progs/eff_qr.go" `/package/` `$`}}
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The pieces up to <code>main</code> should be easy to follow.
 | ||
| The one flag sets a default HTTP port for our server.  The template
 | ||
| variable <code>templ</code> is where the fun happens. It builds an HTML template
 | ||
| that will be executed by the server to display the page; more about
 | ||
| that in a moment.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The <code>main</code> function parses the flags and, using the mechanism
 | ||
| we talked about above, binds the function <code>QR</code> to the root path
 | ||
| for the server.  Then <code>http.ListenAndServe</code> is called to start the
 | ||
| server; it blocks while the server runs.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| <code>QR</code> just receives the request, which contains form data, and
 | ||
| executes the template on the data in the form value named <code>s</code>.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The template package <code>html/template</code> is powerful;
 | ||
| this program just touches on its capabilities.
 | ||
| In essence, it rewrites a piece of HTML text on the fly by substituting elements derived
 | ||
| from data items passed to <code>templ.Execute</code>, in this case the
 | ||
| form value.
 | ||
| Within the template text (<code>templateStr</code>),
 | ||
| double-brace-delimited pieces denote template actions.
 | ||
| The piece from <code>{{html "{{if .}}"}}</code>
 | ||
| to <code>{{html "{{end}}"}}</code> executes only if the value of the current data item, called <code>.</code> (dot),
 | ||
| is non-empty.
 | ||
| That is, when the string is empty, this piece of the template is suppressed.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The two snippets <code>{{html "{{.}}"}}</code> say to show the data presented to
 | ||
| the template—the query string—on the web page.
 | ||
| The HTML template package automatically provides appropriate escaping so the
 | ||
| text is safe to display.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| The rest of the template string is just the HTML to show when the page loads.
 | ||
| If this is too quick an explanation, see the <a href="/pkg/html/template/">documentation</a>
 | ||
| for the template package for a more thorough discussion.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| <p>
 | ||
| And there you have it: a useful web server in a few lines of code plus some
 | ||
| data-driven HTML text.
 | ||
| Go is powerful enough to make a lot happen in a few lines.
 | ||
| </p>
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| <!--
 | ||
| TODO
 | ||
| <pre>
 | ||
| verifying implementation
 | ||
| type Color uint32
 | ||
| 
 | ||
| // Check that Color implements image.Color and image.Image
 | ||
| var _ image.Color = Black
 | ||
| var _ image.Image = Black
 | ||
| </pre>
 | ||
| -->
 |