|  | <!--{ | 
|  | "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, | 
|  | you can use the <a href="/cmd/go/#hdr-Show_documentation_for_package_or_symbol">doc</a> | 
|  | subcommand of the <a href="/cmd/go/">go</a> tool | 
|  | and run the output 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> | 
|  | $ go doc -all 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> | 
|  | $ go doc -all regexp | grep -i parse | 
|  | Compile parses a regular expression and returns, if successful, a Regexp | 
|  | MustCompile is like Compile but panics if the expression cannot be parsed. | 
|  | parsed. It simplifies safe initialization of global variables holding | 
|  | $ | 
|  | </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 '�' 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. | 
|  | n += nbytes | 
|  | if nbytes == 0 || e != nil { | 
|  | err = e | 
|  | break | 
|  | } | 
|  | } | 
|  | </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. | 
|  | (It also has complexity O(N²), which is poor.) We can share the | 
|  | effort (and also speed it up) 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 { | 
|  | s = s.Copy() | 
|  | 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 { | 
|  | s = s.Copy() | 
|  | 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>Print</code>, <code>Printf</code>, <code>Println</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.Println("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) Printf(format string, args ...interface{}) { | 
|  | job.Logger.Printf("%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 <code>chart.apis.google.com</code> | 
|  | 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> | 
|  | --> |