I'm trying to assign a value to a field, but my program panics with runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference.
package main
type Node struct {
Value int
}
func (n *Node) SetValue(value int) {
n.Value = value
}
func main() {
var n *Node
n.SetValue(1)
}
This is reasonable since variable is nil.
But I've fount some Go internal structs are allowed to do this, e.g. bytes.Buffer
package main
import "bytes"
import "io"
import "os"
func main() {
var b bytes.Buffer
b.Write([]byte("Hello world"))
io.Copy(os.Stdout, &b)
}
Here is the `bytes.Buffer source code
func (b *Buffer) Write(p []byte) (n int, err error) {
b.lastRead = opInvalid
m := b.grow(len(p))
return copy(b.buf[m:], p), nil
}
Is it the thing only builtin structs can do or it's possible to accomplish this in my code?
EDIT
Here is the working example. Thanks #twotwotwo for suggestion.
package main
import "fmt"
type Node struct {
Value int
}
func (n *Node) SetValue(value int) {
n.Value = value
}
func main() {
var n Node
n.SetValue(1)
fmt.Println(n.Value)
}
The crucial thing is var b bytes.Buffer doesn't get you a nil pointer, it gets you a bytes.Buffer object with all its fields initialized with their zero values (in machine terms, with zero bytes). The spec says the zero value is "false for booleans, 0 for integers, 0.0 for floats, "" for strings, and nil for pointers, functions, interfaces, slices, channels, and maps"; follow that link for more detail.
It is possible to make your own structs whose zero values work and the Go team encourages it. struct Position { x, y int } is an easy example and Effective Go gives a more realistic one. But note that that doesn't make the nil pointer work; you would still need new(Node) or var n Node to allocate the zero Node. Same for bytes.Buffer.
Another common use of zero values: wherever your users create structs of your type directly (as folks do with, say, http.Server), the zero value is the default for any fields they don't specify. It's the default in a lot of other places: what you get for a not-found map key, if you receive from a closed channel, and probably others.
Related
From reflect package, I use DeepEqual function check similarity of both value. It works until I use function as value.
package main
import "fmt"
import "reflect"
type thisHandler func(s string)
func main() {
var a thisHandler = func(s string) {
fmt.Println(s)
}
b := a
c := a
fmt.Println(b)
fmt.Println(c)
fmt.Println(reflect.DeepEqual(b,c))
}
Playground
Why can't DeepEqual check similarity of value of a function?
Based on it's documentation said:
https://golang.org/pkg/reflect/#DeepEqual
...
Func values are deeply equal if both are nil; otherwise they are
not deeply equal.
...
In general DeepEqual is a recursive relaxation
of Go's == operator. However, this idea is impossible to implement
without some inconsistency. Specifically, it is possible for a value
to be unequal to itself, either because it is of func type
(uncomparable in general)...
I've had difficulty learning the basics of reflect, pointers and interface in go, so here's another entry level question I can't seem to figure out.
This code does what I want it to do - I'm using reflect to add another record to a slice that's typed as an interface.
package main
import (
"reflect"
"log"
)
type Person struct {
Name string
}
func Add(slice interface{}) {
s := reflect.ValueOf(slice).Elem()
// in my actual code, p is declared via the use of reflect.New([Type])
p := Person{Name:"Sam"}
s.Set(reflect.Append(s,reflect.ValueOf(p)))
}
func main() {
p := []Person{}
Add(&p)
log.Println(p)
}
If I changed the Add and main function to this, things don't work the way I want it to.
func Add(slice interface{}) {
s := reflect.ValueOf(&slice).Elem()
p := Person{Name:"Sam"}
s.Set(reflect.Append(reflect.ValueOf(slice),reflect.ValueOf(p)))
log.Println(s)
}
func main() {
p := []Person{}
Add(p)
log.Println(p)
}
That is, the log.Println(p) at the end doesn't show a slice with the record Sam in it like the way I had hoped. So my question is whether it's possible for me to have Add() receive a slice that is not a pointer, and for me to still write some code in Add() that will produce the outcome shown in my first scenario?
A lot of my recent questions dance around this kind of subject, so it's still taking me a while to figure out how to use the reflect package effectively.
No, it's not possible to append to a slice in a function without passing in a pointer to the slice. This isn't related to reflection, but to how variables are passed in to functions. Here's the same code, modified to not use reflection:
package main
import (
"log"
)
type Person struct {
Name string
}
func AddWithPtr(slicep interface{}) {
sp := slicep.(*[]Person)
// This modifies p1 itself, since *sp IS p1
*sp = append(*sp, Person{"Sam"})
}
func Add(slice interface{}) {
// s is now a copy of p2
s := slice.([]Person)
sp := &s
// This modifies a copy of p2 (i.e. s), not p2 itself
*sp = append(*sp, Person{"Sam"})
}
func main() {
p1 := []Person{}
// This passes a reference to p1
AddWithPtr(&p1)
log.Println("Add with pointer: ", p1)
p2 := []Person{}
// This passes a copy of p2
Add(p2)
log.Println("Add without pointer:", p2)
}
(Above, when it says 'copy' of the slice, it doesn't mean the copy of the underlying data - just the slice)
When you pass in a slice, the function effectively gets a new slice that refers to the same data as the original. Appending to the slice in the function increases the length of the new slice, but doesn't change the length of the original slice that was passed in. That's why the original slice remains unchanged.
a := []int{1,2,3}
x, a := a[len(a)-1], a[:len(a)-1]
fmt.Println(a,x)
How to create a pop() function that will do the same for any type of an array?
Here is what I came up with so far:
func pop(a []*interface{}) interface{}{
x := a[len(a)-1]
a = a[:len(a)-1]
return x
}
func main(){
a := []int{1,2,3}
x = pop(a)
fmt.Println(a,x) // -> [1,2] 3
}
But I get cannot use a (type []int) as type []interface {}or other error messages if I try to tweak the code by trial and error.
package main
import (
"fmt"
"reflect"
)
func pop(a interface{}) interface{} {
v := reflect.ValueOf(a).Elem()
x := v.Index(v.Len() - 1)
v.SetLen(v.Len() - 1)
return x
}
func main() {
a := []int{1, 2, 3}
x := pop(&a)
fmt.Println(a, x) // -> [1,2] 3
}
Though this can be implemented, I still think that x, a = a[len(a)-1], a[:len(a)-1] should be better than a pop function.
The go type system doesn't allow you to cast from []type1 -> []type2. Even if it did interfaces are a struct containing a type id and pointer to the object, where normally you would just have the object. Because of this you need to take a interface{} and use reflect to do the slicing.
func pop(slice interface{}) (interface{}, interface{}) {
v := reflect.ValueOf(slice)
return v.Slice(0,v.Len()-1).Interface(), v.Index(v.Len()-1).Interface()
}
Go Playground
Note that this loses compile time type safety, because it must use an interface. Additionally, due to using interfaces the poped value may be allocated, creating extra GC pressure.
Common Go style typically recommends not writing a function like this, and just inlining the small amount of code manually.
After all that really good anwers using reflection I also want to add one answer which offers a more idiomatic Go solution. Like Rob Pike said in his great talk about Go Proverbs
interface{} says nothing
Reflection is never clear
So there should be also one answer showing the idiomatic Go way. This solution does not work for slices of standard types. But there the answer of cshu shows the best solution: x, a = a[len(a)-1], a[:len(a)-1]
For own defined types we have to define a Poper interface and the Pop function takes that as input and returns an empty interface.
type Poper interface {
Pop() interface{}
}
type MyType struct {
a []int
}
func (mt *MyType) Pop() interface{} {
x := mt.a[len(mt.a)-1]
mt.a = mt.a[:len(mt.a)-1]
return x
}
func Pop(p Poper) interface{} {
return p.Pop()
}
func main() {
a := &MyType{[]int{1, 2, 3}}
fmt.Println(Pop(a), a)
}
https://play.golang.org/p/UbDkoVYSMA
At all it is not a good idea to return an empty interface, because all following code has to support the interface{}.
The following code example does not work:
func main() {
a := &MyType{[]int{1, 2, 3}}
fmt.Println(Pop(a), a)
var b int
b = Pop(a)
}
https://play.golang.org/p/wg9__O44A8
The error says everything about that problem: cannot use Pop(a) (type interface {}) as type int in assignment: need type assertion
So the Pop() function does work by returning interface{} but the rest of the code using the result of that function needs to make a type assertion. So if you can avoid it you should search for another solution using types.
I have a struct in which I put all excess data into a map[string]interface{}.
If I unmarshal into the Data property with an empty variable, I don't want to keep it when marshalling. I basically need interface{} to have json:",omitempty", How do I get that?
type Event struct {
From string `json:"from"`
Data map[string]interface{} `json:"data,omitempty"`
}
The omitempty is for encoding values, but not for decoding.
You cannot generate a complete empty map in Go. (Empty as in, it does not exists.) If your create a variable / value of a struct it always has its default value.
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
var m map[string]interface{}
fmt.Printf("%v %d\n", m, len(m))
// prints: map[] 0
m = nil
fmt.Printf("%v %d\n", m, len(m))
// prints: map[] 0
}
Example: Go Playground.
I'd like to know if there's anything native that supports it. However until then, you can do it via reflection:
package main
import (
"encoding/json"
"fmt"
"reflect"
)
func main() {
m := map[string]interface{}{
"should_exist": "foo",
"should_omit": "",
}
for k, v := range m {
if reflect.ValueOf(v).IsZero() {
delete(m, k)
}
}
data, _ := json.Marshal(m)
fmt.Println(string(data)) // {"should_exist":"foo"}
}
Please note the performance hit this might cause in some use cases.
I'm trying to get a better understanding of go. I created a little exercise for myself: pass a pointer slice to a function and modify it.
This is what I came up with:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"unsafe"
)
func main() {
var data *[]byte
fillData(data)
fmt.Println((*data)[0:5])
}
func fillData(data *[]byte) {
b := []byte("hello")
fmt.Println(b[0:5])
fmt.Println(string(b[0:5]))
data = (*[]byte)(unsafe.Pointer(&b[0]))
}
But it gives an invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference error. I know I wouldn't use something like this in real code but I was just curious how to pass a slice and modify it without returning it.
https://play.golang.org/p/_K5ltKKKNV
When you try to update data in fillData, you make two errors. First, you update the pointer rather than what it's pointed to. Second, data is a nil pointer, so writing through that pointer will cause a nil pointer error.
Here's one possible way to write the code. data starts as a zero'ed slice, and gets updated inside fillData. This will copy the slice information (len, cap, and pointer to array) from b to *data which means that data will share information with b (importantly, including sharing the underlying array).
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
var data []byte
fillData(&data)
fmt.Println(data, data[0:5])
}
func fillData(data *[]byte) {
b := []byte("hello")
*data = b[0:1]
}
Another way would be to have data being a pointer, and updating it. Then you have to pass a double pointer into fillData. That would look like this:
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
var data *[]byte
fillData(&data)
fmt.Println((*data)[0:5])
}
func fillData(data **[]byte) {
b := []byte("hello")
*data = &b
}
Finally, the best way to write this code isn't to use pointers at all, and just return the slice. Unlike C or C++, it's rarely needed to use "output" parameters to functions. That's because go allows multiple return values.
package main
import "fmt"
func main() {
data := getData()
fmt.Println(data, data[0:5])
}
func getData() []byte {
return []byte("hello")[:1]
}