In Go I can do something like this:
func main() {
var intSlice []interface{}
intSlice = append(intSlice, "hello world")
intSlice = append(intSlice, 1)
for _, v := range intSlice {
fmt.Println(v) // hello world
// 1
}
}
Since a slice is deep down an array, without given a specific type to that array, how can Go know the layout of this array's memory structure? If it's a []string then I know that for every iteration I have to add current address with 4 to get the next item's address, but for an interface{} how can Go knows what to do? I am confused. One possible explain for this is that interface{} is actually a pointer, so []interface{} stores pointers only, the value 1 or "hello world" is stored somewhere outside of the slice. Am I right about this?
An interface is two values: a pointer to the value, and a pointer to the type of the value. So a []interface{} containing all int values is simply an array of interfaces, where each element containing those two values, with each element of the array pointing to the int value, and to its type.
Related
Is there an easy and compact way using Testify to assert that a slice of pointers to strings contains a pointer to a string that matches my expectation?
Imagine that you're getting a slice of pointers to strings back from a function call (maybe from an API), and you'd like to validate that it contains pointers to the strings that you'd expect. To simulate that, I'll just make a test data structure to illustrate my point:
// Shared Fixture
var one = "one"
var two = "two"
var three = "three"
var slice = []*string{&one, &two, &three}
Now I want to write a test that asserts the slice contains an expected value. I could write this test:
func TestSliceContainsString(t *testing.T) {
assert.Contains(t, slice, "one")
}
It doesn't work: []*string{(*string)(0x22994f0), (*string)(0x2299510), (*string)(0x2299500)} does not contain "one". Makes sense, the slice contains pointers to strings, and the string "one" is not one of those pointers.
I could convert it first. It takes more code, but it works:
func TestDereferencedSliceContainsString(t *testing.T) {
deref := make([]string, len(slice))
for i, v := range slice {
deref[i] = *v
}
assert.Contains(t, deref, "one")
}
I can also pass a pointer to a string as my expectation:
func TestSliceContainsPointerToExpectation(t *testing.T) {
expect := "one"
assert.Same(t, &one, &one)
assert.NotSame(t, &one, &expect)
// How can I assert that they contain values
assert.Contains(t, slice, &expect)
}
Honestly, that's not bad. I can assert that a reference to a string (pointing to a difference memory location) contains the value that I expect. The main annoyance with this path is that I can't pass a reference to a literal, which would make it take less space:
func TestSliceContainsString(t *testing.T) {
assert.Contains(t, slice, &"one")
}
Is there another approach that I'm not considering? Is one of these more idiomatic of golang/testify?
Yes, unfortunately the &"one" syntax isn't valid (a few years ago, I opened an issue to allow that syntax; it was closed, though Rob Pike opened a similar issue more recently).
For now, I think the best approach is to just take the address of a variable, as in your TestSliceContainsPointerToExpectation. Or, if you're doing this often, you can write a simple stringPtr function so you can do it as a one-liner:
func stringPtr(value string) *string {
return &value
}
func TestSliceContainsString(t *testing.T) {
assert.Contains(t, slice, stringPtr("one"))
}
Or, if you're using at least Go 1.18 (with generics), you can make a generic ptr function:
func ptr[T any](value T) *T {
return &value
}
func TestSliceContains(t *testing.T) {
assert.Contains(t, slice, ptr("one"))
}
See these in the Go Playground.
Not able to figure out how to convert interface{} returned from function into an array of structs
As part of some practise i was trying to create a function which can take 2 slices of some type and concatenates both and returns the slice.
The code can be found here - https://play.golang.org/p/P9pfrf_qTS1
type mystruct struct {
name string
value string
}
func appendarr(array1 interface{}, array2 interface{}) interface{} {
p := reflect.ValueOf(array1)
q := reflect.ValueOf(array2)
r := reflect.AppendSlice(p, q)
return reflect.ValueOf(r).Interface()
}
func main() {
fmt.Println("=======")
array1 := []mystruct{
mystruct{"a1n1", "a1v1"},
mystruct{"a1n2", "a1v2"},
}
array2 := []mystruct{
mystruct{"a2n1", "a2v1"},
mystruct{"a2n2", "a2v2"},
}
arrayOp := appendarr(array1, array2)
fmt.Printf("arr: %#v\n", arrayOp) // this shows all the elements from array1 and 2
val := reflect.ValueOf(arrayOp)
fmt.Println(val) // output is <[]main.mystruct Value>
fmt.Println(val.Interface().([]mystruct)) // exception - interface {} is reflect.Value, not []main.mystruct
}
I may have slices of different types of structs. I want to concatenate them and access the elements individually.
If there is any other way of achieving the same, please do let me know.
reflect.Append() returns a value of type reflect.Value, so you don't have to (you shouldn't) pass that to reflect.ValueOf().
So simply change the return statement to:
return r.Interface()
With this it works and outputs (try it on the Go Playground):
=======
arr: []main.mystruct{main.mystruct{name:"a1n1", value:"a1v1"}, main.mystruct{name:"a1n2", value:"a1v2"}, main.mystruct{name:"a2n1", value:"a2v1"}, main.mystruct{name:"a2n2", value:"a2v2"}}
[{a1n1 a1v1} {a1n2 a1v2} {a2n1 a2v1} {a2n2 a2v2}]
[{a1n1 a1v1} {a1n2 a1v2} {a2n1 a2v1} {a2n2 a2v2}]
You also don't need to do any reflection-kungfu on the result: it's your slice wrapped in interface{}. Wrapping it in reflect.Value and calling Value.Interface() on it is just a redundant cycle. You may simply do:
arrayOp.([]mystruct)
On a side note: you shouldn't create a "generic" append() function that uses reflection under the hood, as this functionality is available as a built-in function append(). The builtin function is generic, it gets help from the compiler so it provides the generic nature at compile-time. Whatever you come up with using reflection will be slower.
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
a := SomeType{myslice: []int{1, 2, 3}, decimal: 2.33}
for _, i := range a.myslice {
fmt.Println(i)
}
fmt.Println(a.decimal)
addOne(a)
for _, i := range a.myslice {
fmt.Println(i)
}
fmt.Println(a.decimal)
}
type SomeType struct {
myslice []int
decimal float32
}
func addOne(s SomeType) {
s.myslice[0]++
s.decimal += 1.2
}
The output for the code above is:
1
2
3
2.33
2
2
3
2.33
Even though i have not passed the SomeType object a by reference the myslice field is being modified in the original object. Why is this happening? Is there anyway to pass the entire object by value without having to create a copy of the original object?
The slice is not really being passed by reference; if you append to it in addOne, its length will not change. But a slice contains a reference (or pointer) to its backing array. So when you copy a slice, the new one shares the same backing array with the old one.
The fact that the slice is inside a struct doesn't make any difference. You would see the same thing if you changed addOne to just take a slice instead of the whole struct.
I've started learning Go these days and got stuck in trying to pass a struct property's value (a slice) to a function. Apparently it's being passed as a reference (or it holds a pointer to its slice) and changes made inside the function affect it.
Here is my code, in which testFunction is supposed to receive a slice, remove its first 3 elements and print the updated values, but without affecting it externally:
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
type testStruct struct {
testArray []float64
}
var test = testStruct {
testArray: []float64{10,20,30,40,50},
}
func main() {
fmt.Println(test.testArray)
testFunction(test.testArray)
fmt.Println(test.testArray)
}
func testFunction(array []float64) {
for i:=0; i<3; i++ {
array = removeFrom(array, 0)
}
fmt.Println(array)
}
func removeFrom(array []float64, index int) []float64 {
return append(array[:index], array[index+1:]...)
}
That outputs:
[10 20 30 40 50]
[40 50]
[40 50 50 50 50]
My question is: what is causing the third fmt.Println to print this strange result?
Playground: https://play.golang.org/p/G8W3H085In
p.s.: This code is only an example. It's not my goal to remove the first elements of something. I just wanna know what is causing this strange behaviour.
Usually we don't know whether a given call to append will cause a reallocation, so we can't assume that the original slice refers to the same array as the resulting slice, nor that it refers to a different one.
To use slices correctly, it's important to remember that although the elements of the underlying array are indirect, the slice's pointer, length and capacity are not.
As a result, it's usual to assign the result of a call to append to the same slice variable:
array = append(array, ...)
So to sum up, to receive the desired result always remember to assign the append function to a new or the same slice variable.
Here is the corrected and working code:
package main
import (
"fmt"
)
type testStruct struct {
testArray []float64
}
var test = testStruct {
testArray: []float64{10,20,30,40,50},
}
func main() {
fmt.Println(test.testArray)
a := testFunction(test.testArray)
fmt.Println(a)
}
func testFunction(array []float64)[]float64 {
for i:=0; i<3; i++ {
array = removeFrom(array, 0)
}
fmt.Println(array)
return array
}
func removeFrom(array []float64, index int) []float64 {
return append(array[:index], array[index+1:]...)
}
Check it the working code on Go Playground.
Another solution is to pass the array argument via pointer reference:
func testFunction(array *[]float64) {
for i:=0; i<3; i++ {
*array = removeFrom(*array, 0)
}
fmt.Println(*array)
}
Go Playground
The slice is a composite type. It has a pointer to the data, the length and the capacity. When you pass it as an argument you're passing those values, the pointer, the length and the capacity; they are copies, always.
In your case you modify the data within the slice when you call removeFrom(), which you can do because you've copied the value of a pointer to the original data into the func, but the length and capacity remain unchanged outside the scope of that function as those are not pointers.
So, when you print it again from main() you see the altered values but it still uses the original length and capacity as any changes made to those within the scope of the other funcs were actually on copies of those values.
Here is a useful blog post about slices https://blog.golang.org/slices. It states this in particular.
It's important to understand that even though a slice contains a
pointer, it is itself a value. Under the covers, it is a struct value
holding a pointer and a length. It is not a pointer to a struct.
The reason you see [40 50 50 50 50] is because you changed the values in the slice, but you did not alter the slice itself(it's cap and len)
I wrote some odd code, but I'm not sure why it works and what I can learn from it. I have a slice type build from another struct. I made a function on the slice type to modify itself. To do this, I seem to have to throw around *'s a little much.
I'm trying to learn about pointers in Go and would like a little help. Here's an example (http://play.golang.org/p/roU3MEeT3q):
var ClientNames = []string {"Client A", "Client B", "ClientC"}
type InvoiceSummaries []InvoiceSummary
type InvoiceSummary struct {
Client string
Amt int
}
func (summaries *InvoiceSummaries) BuildFromAbove() {
for _, name := range ClientNames {
*summaries = append(*summaries, InvoiceSummary{name, 100})
}
}
My question is: What is the purpose for each of these * and why am I not using any &?
What is the purpose for each of these * ?
By making the method receiver as pointer, you could easily change the property of the object. I think that's one of the benefit. This example below will prove it.
package main
import "fmt"
type someStruct struct {
someVar int
}
func (s someStruct) changeVal1(newVal int) {
s.someVar = newVal
}
func (s *someStruct) changeVal2(newVal int) {
s.someVar = newVal
}
func main() {
s := someStruct{0}
fmt.Println(s) // {0}
s.changeVal1(3)
fmt.Println(s) // {0}
s.changeVal2(4)
fmt.Println(s) // {4}
(&s).changeVal2(5)
fmt.Println(s) // {5}
}
and why am I not using any &?
Pointer method receiver is quite special, it can also be called from non-pointer struct object. Both of s.changeVal2(4) and (&s).changeVal2(5) are valid & will affect the value of someVar.
Example http://play.golang.org/p/sxCnCD2D6d
You have to use a pointer for the receiver - (summaries *InvoiceSummaries) - because otherwise the argument is passed by value, having a pointer means you pass a reference to the value instead. If not for that, then you couldn't modify the collection at all.
Inside of the methods body you have use * because it is the dereferncing operator and returns the value at the address. Ampersand (&) is the opposite, it gives the address of a value.
Nothing wrong with your code but normally addresses to slices aren't used. A slice is a small struct that gophers are normally happy to pass by value. If a method or function is creating a new slice, the gopher is happy to return the new slice, by value again, as the return value.
Of course passing a slice by value doesn't guarantee anything about the backing store remaining unchanged when the method/function returns. So it can't be used as a way of guaranteeing the data elements of the slice haven't mutated.