| About This Book | |
| 1 | |
| License | |
| The Little Go Book is licensed under the AttributionNonCommercialShareAlike 4.0 International license. You should | |
| not have paid for this book. | |
| You are free to copy, distribute, modify or display the book. However, I ask that you always attribute the book to me, | |
| Karl Seguin, and do not use it for commercial purposes. | |
| You can see the full text of the license at: | |
| https://creativecommons.org/licenses/byncsa/4.0/ | |
| 2 | |
| Latest Version | |
| The latest source of this book is available at: https://github.com/karlseguin/thelittlegobook | |
| 3 | |
| 4 | |
| Introduction | |
| I’ve always had a lovehate relationship when it comes to learning new languages. On the one hand, languages are so | |
| fundamental to what we do, that even small changes can have measurable impact. That aha moment when something | |
| clicks can have a lasting effect on how you program and can redefine your expectations of other languages. On the | |
| downside, language design is fairly incremental. Learning new keywords, type system, coding style as well as new | |
| libraries, communities and paradigms is a lot of work that seems hard to justify. Compared to everything else we have | |
| to learn, new languages often feel like a poor investment of our time. | |
| That said, we have to move forward. We have to be willing to take incremental steps because, again, languages are the | |
| foundation of what we do. Though the changes are often incremental, they tend to have a wide scope and they impact | |
| productivity, readability, performance, testability, dependency management, error handling, documentation, profiling, | |
| communities, standard libraries, and so on. Is there a positive way to say death by a thousand cuts? | |
| That leaves us with an important question: why Go? For me, there are two compelling reasons. The first is that it’s | |
| a relatively simple language with a relatively simple standard library. In a lot of ways, the incremental nature of Go is | |
| to simplify some of the complexity we’ve seen being added to languages over the last couple of decades. The other | |
| reason is that for many developers, it will complement your existing arsenal. | |
| Go was built as a system language (e.g., operating systems, device drivers) and thus aimed at C and C++ developers. | |
| According to the Go team, and which is certainly true of me, application developers, not system developers, have | |
| become the primary Go users. Why? I can’t speak authoritatively for system developers, but for those of us building | |
| websites, services, desktop applications and the like, it partially comes down to the emerging need for a class of systems | |
| that sit somewhere in between lowlevel system applications and higherlevel applications. | |
| Maybe it’s a messaging, caching, computationalheavy data analysis, command line interface, logging or monitoring. | |
| I don’t know what label to give it, but over the course of my career, as systems continue to grow in complexity | |
| and as concurrency frequently measures in the tens of thousands, there’s clearly been a growing need for custom | |
| infrastructuretype systems. You can build such systems with Ruby or Python or something else (and many people do), | |
| but these types of systems can benefit from a more rigid type system and greater performance. Similarly, you can use | |
| Go to build websites (and many people do), but I still prefer, by a wide margin, the expressiveness of Node or Ruby for | |
| such systems. | |
| There are other areas where Go excels. For example, there are no dependencies when running a compiled Go program. | |
| You don’t have to worry if your users have Ruby or the JVM installed, and if so, what version. For this reason, Go is | |
| becoming increasingly popular as a language for commandline interface programs and other types of utility programs | |
| 5 | |
| you need to distribute (e.g., a log collector). | |
| Put plainly, learning Go is an efficient use of your time. You won’t have to spend long hours learning or even mastering | |
| Go, and you’ll end up with something practical from your effort. | |
| 6 | |
| A Note from the Author | |
| I’ve hesitated writing this book for a couple reasons. The first is that Go’s own documentation, in particular Effective | |
| Go, is solid. | |
| The other is my discomfort at writing a book about a language. When I wrote The Little MongoDB Book, it was safe | |
| to assume most readers understood the basics of relational database and modeling. With The Little Redis Book, you | |
| could assume a familiarity with a key value store and take it from there. | |
| As I think about the paragraphs and chapters that lay ahead, I know that I won’t be able to make those same assump | |
| tions. How much time do you spend talking about interfaces knowing that for some, the concept will be new, while | |
| others won’t need much more than Go has interfaces? Ultimately, I take comfort in knowing that you’ll let me know if | |
| some parts are too shallow or others too detailed. Consider that the price of this book. | |
| 7 | |
| 8 | |
| Getting Started | |
| If you’re looking to play a little with Go, you should check out the Go Playground which lets you run code online without | |
| having to install anything. This is also the most common way to share Go code when seeking help in Go’s discussion | |
| forum and places like StackOverflow. | |
| Installing Go is straightforward. You can install it from source, but I suggest you use one of the precompiled binaries. | |
| When you go to the download page, you’ll see installers for various platforms. Let’s avoid these and learn how to set | |
| up Go ourselves. As you’ll see, it isn’t hard. | |
| Except for simple examples, Go is designed to work when your code is inside a workspace. The workspace is a folder | |
| composed of bin, pkg and src subfolders. You might be tempted to force Go to follow your own style don’t. | |
| Normally, I put my projects inside of ~/code. For example, ~/code/blog contains my blog. For Go, my workspace is | |
| ~/code/go and my Gopowered blog would be in ~/code/go/src/blog. | |
| In short, create a go folder with a src subfolder wherever you expect to put your projects. | |
| 9 | |
| OSX / Linux | |
| Download the tar.gz for your platform. For OSX, you’ll most likely be interested in go#.#.#.darwinamd64osx10 | |
| .8.tar.gz, where #.#.# is the latest version of Go. | |
| Extract the file to /usr/local via tar C /usr/local xzf go#.#.#.darwinamd64osx10.8.tar.gz. | |
| Set up two environment variables: | |
| 1. GOPATH points to your workspace, for me, that’s $HOME/code/go. | |
| 2. We need to append Go’s binary to our PATH. | |
| You can set these up from a shell: | |
| echo 'export GOPATH=$HOME/code/go' >> $HOME/.profile | |
| echo 'export PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/go/bin' >> $HOME/.profile | |
| You’ll want to activate these variables. You can close and reopen your shell, or you can run source $HOME/.profile. | |
| Type go version and you’ll hopefully get an output that looks like go version go1.3.3 darwin/amd64. | |
| 10 | |
| Windows | |
| Download the latest zip file. If you’re on an x64 system, you’ll want go#.#.#.windowsamd64.zip, where #.#.# is | |
| the latest version of Go. | |
| Unzip it at a location of your choosing. c:\Go is a good choice. | |
| Set up two environment variables: | |
| 1. GOPATH points to your workspace. That might be something like c:\users\goku\work\go. | |
| 2. Add c:\Go\bin to your PATH environment variable. | |
| Environment variables can be set through the Environment Variables button on the Advanced tab of the System | |
| control panel. Some versions of Windows provide this control panel through the Advanced System Settings option | |
| inside the System control panel. | |
| Open a command prompt and type go version. You’ll hopefully get an output that looks like go version go1.3.3 | |
| windows/amd64. | |
| 11 | |
| 12 | |
| Chapter 1 The Basics | |
| Go is a compiled, statically typed language with a Clike syntax and garbage collection. What does that mean? | |
| 13 | |
| Compilation | |
| Compilation is the process of translating the source code that you write into a lower level language – either assembly | |
| (as is the case with Go), or some other intermediary language (as with Java and C#). | |
| Compiled languages can be unpleasant to work with because compilation can be slow. It’s hard to iterate quickly if you | |
| have to spend minutes or hours waiting for code to compile. Compilation speed is one of the major design goals of Go. | |
| This is good news for people working on large projects as well as those of us used to a quick feedback cycle offered by | |
| interpreted languages. | |
| Compiled languages tend to run faster and the executable can be run without additional dependencies (at least, that’s | |
| true for languages like C, C++ and Go which compile directly to assembly). | |
| 14 | |
| Static Typing | |
| Being statically typed means that variables must be of a specific type (int, string, bool, []byte, etc.). This is either | |
| achieved by specifying the type when the variable is declared or, in many cases, letting the compiler infer the type | |
| (we’ll look at examples shortly). | |
| There’s a lot more that can be said about static typing, but I believe it’s something better understood by looking at | |
| code. If you’re used to dynamically typed languages, you might find this cumbersome. You’re not wrong, but there | |
| are advantages, especially when you pair static typing with compilation. The two are often conflated. It’s true that | |
| when you have one, you normally have the other but it isn’t a hard rule. With a rigid type system, a compiler is able | |
| to detect problems beyond mere syntactical mistakes as well as make further optimizations. | |
| 15 | |
| CLike Syntax | |
| Saying that a language has a Clike syntax means that if you’re used to any other Clike languages such as C, C++, | |
| Java, JavaScript and C#, then you’re going to find Go familiar – superficially, at least. For example, it means && is used | |
| as a boolean AND, == is used to compare equality, { and } start and end a scope, and array indexes start at 0. | |
| Clike syntax also tends to mean semicolon terminated lines and parentheses around conditions. Go does away with | |
| both of these, though parentheses are still used to control precedence. For example, an if statement looks like this: | |
| if name == "Leto" { | |
| print("the spice must flow") | |
| } | |
| And in more complicated cases, parentheses are still useful: | |
| if (name == "Goku" && power > 9000) || (name == "gohan" && power < 4000) { | |
| print("super Saiyan") | |
| } | |
| Beyond this, Go is much closer to C than C# or Java not only in terms of syntax, but in terms of purpose. That’s | |
| reflected in the terseness and simplicity of the language which will hopefully start to become obvious as you learn it. | |
| 16 | |
| Garbage Collected | |
| Some variables, when created, have an easytodefine life. A variable local to a function, for example, disappears when | |
| the function exits. In other cases, it isn’t so obvious – at least to a compiler. For example, the lifetime of a variable | |
| returned by a function or referenced by other variables and objects can be tricky to determine. Without garbage | |
| collection, it’s up to developers to free the memory associated with such variables at a point where the developer | |
| knows the variable isn’t needed. How? In C, you’d literally free(str); the variable. | |
| Languages with garbage collectors (e.g., Ruby, Python, Java, JavaScript, C#, Go) are able to keep track of these | |
| and free them when they’re no longer used. Garbage collection adds overhead, but it also eliminates a number of | |
| devastating bugs. | |
| 17 | |
| Running Go Code | |
| Let’s start our journey by creating a simple program and learning how to compile and execute it. Open your favorite | |
| text editor and write the following code: | |
| package main | |
| func main() { | |
| println("it's over 9000!") | |
| } | |
| Save the file as main.go. For now, you can save it anywhere you want; we don’t need to live inside Go’s workspace | |
| for trivial examples. | |
| Next, open a shell/command prompt and change the directory to where you saved the file. For me, that means typing | |
| cd ~/code. | |
| Finally, run the program by entering: | |
| go run main.go | |
| If everything worked, you should see it’s over 9000!. | |
| But wait, what about the compilation step? go run is a handy command that compiles and runs your code. It uses | |
| a temporary directory to build the program, executes it and then cleans itself up. You can see the location of the | |
| temporary file by running: | |
| go run work main.go | |
| To explicitly compile code, use go build: | |
| go build main.go | |
| This will generate an executable main which you can run. On Linux / OSX, don’t forget that you need to prefix the | |
| executable with dotslash, so you need to type ./main. | |
| While developing, you can use either go run or go build. When you deploy your code however, you’ll want to deploy | |
| a binary via go build and execute that. | |
| Main | |
| Hopefully, the code that we just executed is understandable. We’ve created a function and printed out a string with the | |
| builtin println function. Did go run know what to execute because there was only a single choice? No. In Go, the | |
| entry point to a program has to be a function called main within a package main. | |
| We’ll talk more about packages in a later chapter. For now, while we focus on understanding the basics of Go, we’ll | |
| always write our code within the main package. | |
| If you want, you can alter the code and change the package name. Run the code via go run and you should get | |
| an error. Then, change the name back to main but use a different function name. You should see a different error | |
| 18 | |
| message. Try making those same changes but use go build instead. Notice that the code compiles, there’s just no | |
| entry point to run it. This is perfectly normal when you are, for example, building a library. | |
| 19 | |
| Imports | |
| Go has a number of builtin functions, such as println, which can be used without reference. We can’t get very | |
| far though, without making use of Go’s standard library and eventually using thirdparty libraries. In Go, the import | |
| keyword is used to declare the packages that are used by the code in the file. | |
| Let’s change our program: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "os" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| if len(os.Args) != 2 { | |
| os.Exit(1) | |
| } | |
| fmt.Println("It's over", os.Args[1]) | |
| } | |
| Which you can run via: | |
| go run main.go 9000 | |
| We’re now using two of Go’s standard packages: fmt and os. We’ve also introduced another builtin function len. len | |
| returns the size of a string, or the number of values in a dictionary, or, as we see here, the number of elements in an | |
| array. If you’re wondering why we expect 2 arguments, it’s because the first argument – at index 0 – is always the | |
| path of the currently running executable. (Change the program to print it out and see for yourself.) | |
| You’ve probably noticed we prefix the function name with the package, e.g., fmt.Println. This is different from many | |
| other languages. We’ll learn more about packages in later chapters. For now, knowing how to import and use a package | |
| is a good start. | |
| Go is strict about importing packages. It will not compile if you import a package but don’t use it. Try to run the | |
| following: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "os" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| } | |
| 20 | |
| You should get two errors about fmt and os being imported and not used. Can this get annoying? Absolutely. Over | |
| time, you’ll get used to it (it’ll still be annoying though). Go is strict about this because unused imports can slow | |
| compilation; admittedly a problem most of us don’t have to this degree. | |
| Another thing to note is that Go’s standard library is well documented. You can head over to https://golang.org/pkg/ | |
| fmt/#Println to learn more about the Println function that we used. You can click on that section header and see the | |
| source code. Also, scroll to the top to learn more about Go’s formatting capabilities. | |
| If you’re ever stuck without internet access, you can get the documentation running locally via: | |
| godoc http=:6060 | |
| and pointing your browser to http://localhost:6060 | |
| 21 | |
| Variables and Declarations | |
| It’d be nice to begin and end our look at variables by saying you declare and assign to a variable by doing x = 4. | |
| Unfortunately, things are more complicated in Go. We’ll begin our conversation by looking at simple examples. Then, | |
| in the next chapter, we’ll expand this when we look at creating and using structures. Still, it’ll probably take some time | |
| before you truly feel comfortable with it. | |
| You might be thinking Woah! What can be so complicated about this? Let’s start looking at some examples. | |
| The most explicit way to deal with variable declaration and assignment in Go is also the most verbose: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| var power int | |
| power = 9000 | |
| fmt.Printf("It's over %d\n", power) | |
| } | |
| Here, we declare a variable power of type int. By default, Go assigns a zero value to variables. Integers are assigned | |
| 0, booleans false, strings "" and so on. Next, we assign 9000 to our power variable. We can merge the first two | |
| lines: | |
| var power int = 9000 | |
| Still, that’s a lot of typing. Go has a handy short variable declaration operator, :=, which can infer the type: | |
| power := 9000 | |
| This is handy, and it works just as well with functions: | |
| func main() { | |
| power := getPower() | |
| } | |
| func getPower() int { | |
| return 9001 | |
| } | |
| It’s important that you remember that := is used to declare the variable as well as assign a value to it. Why? Because | |
| a variable can’t be declared twice (not in the same scope anyway). If you try to run the following, you’ll get an error. | |
| func main() { | |
| power := 9000 | |
| 22 | |
| fmt.Printf("It's over %d\n", power) | |
| // COMPILER ERROR: | |
| // no new variables on left side of := | |
| power := 9001 | |
| fmt.Printf("It's also over %d\n", power) | |
| } | |
| The compiler will complain with no new variables on left side of :=. This means that when we first declare a variable, | |
| we use := but on subsequent assignment, we use the assignment operator =. This makes a lot of sense, but it can be | |
| tricky for your muscle memory to remember when to switch between the two. | |
| If you read the error message closely, you’ll notice that variables is plural. That’s because Go lets you assign multiple | |
| variables (using either = or :=): | |
| func main() { | |
| name, power := "Goku", 9000 | |
| fmt.Printf("%s's power is over %d\n", name, power) | |
| } | |
| As long as one of the variables is new, := can be used. Consider: | |
| func main() { | |
| power := 1000 | |
| fmt.Printf("default power is %d\n", power) | |
| name, power := "Goku", 9000 | |
| fmt.Printf("%s's power is over %d\n", name, power) | |
| } | |
| Although power is being used twice with :=, the compiler won’t complain the second time we use it, it’ll see that the | |
| other variable, name, is a new variable and allow :=. However, you can’t change the type of power. It was declared | |
| (implicitly) as an integer and thus, can only be assigned integers. | |
| For now, the last thing to know is that, like imports, Go won’t let you have unused variables. For example, | |
| func main() { | |
| name, power := "Goku", 1000 | |
| fmt.Printf("default power is %d\n", power) | |
| } | |
| won’t compile because name is declared but not used. Like unused imports it’ll cause some frustration, but overall I | |
| think it helps with code cleanliness and readability. | |
| There’s more to learn about declaration and assignments. For now, remember that you’ll use var NAME TYPE when | |
| declaring a variable to its zero value, NAME := VALUE when declaring and assigning a value, and NAME = VALUE when | |
| assigning to a previously declared variable. | |
| 23 | |
| Function Declarations | |
| This is a good time to point out that functions can return multiple values. Let’s look at three functions: one with no | |
| return value, one with one return value, and one with two return values. | |
| func log(message string) { | |
| } | |
| func add(a int, b int) int { | |
| } | |
| func power(name string) (int, bool) { | |
| } | |
| We’d use the last one like so: | |
| value, exists := power("goku") | |
| if exists == false { | |
| // handle this error case | |
| } | |
| Sometimes, you only care about one of the return values. In these cases, you assign the other values to _: | |
| _, exists := power("goku") | |
| if exists == false { | |
| // handle this error case | |
| } | |
| This is more than a convention. _, the blank identifier, is special in that the return value isn’t actually assigned. This | |
| lets you use _ over and over again regardless of the returned type. | |
| Finally, there’s something else that you’re likely to run into with function declarations. If parameters share the same | |
| type, we can use a shorter syntax: | |
| func add(a, b int) int { | |
| } | |
| Being able to return multiple values is something you’ll use often. You’ll also frequently use _ to discard a value. Named | |
| return values and the slightly less verbose parameter declaration aren’t that common. Still, you’ll run into all of these | |
| sooner than later so it’s important to know about them. | |
| 24 | |
| Before You Continue | |
| We looked at a number of small individual pieces and it probably feels disjointed at this point. We’ll slowly build larger | |
| examples and hopefully, the pieces will start to come together. | |
| If you’re coming from a dynamic language, the complexity around types and declarations might seem like a step | |
| backwards. I don’t disagree with you. For some systems, dynamic languages are categorically more productive. | |
| If you’re coming from a statically typed language, you’re probably feeling comfortable with Go. Inferred types and | |
| multiple return values are nice (though certainly not exclusive to Go). Hopefully as we learn more, you’ll appreciate | |
| the clean and terse syntax. | |
| 25 | |
| 26 | |
| Chapter 2 Structures | |
| Go isn’t an objectoriented (OO) language like C++, Java, Ruby and C#. It doesn’t have objects nor inheritance and | |
| thus, doesn’t have the many concepts associated with OO such as polymorphism and overloading. | |
| What Go does have are structures, which can be associated with methods. Go also supports a simple but effective form | |
| of composition. Overall, it results in simpler code, but there’ll be occasions where you’ll miss some of what OO has to | |
| offer. (It’s worth pointing out that composition over inheritance is an old battle cry and Go is the first language I’ve | |
| used that takes a firm stand on the issue.) | |
| Although Go doesn’t do OO like you may be used to, you’ll notice a lot of similarities between the definition of a structure | |
| and that of a class. A simple example is the following Saiyan structure: | |
| type Saiyan struct { | |
| Name string | |
| Power int | |
| } | |
| We’ll soon see how to add a method to this structure, much like you’d have methods as part of a class. Before we do | |
| that, we have to dive back into declarations. | |
| 27 | |
| Declarations and Initializations | |
| When we first looked at variables and declarations, we looked only at builtin types, like integers and strings. Now that | |
| we’re talking about structures, we need to expand that conversation to include pointers. | |
| The simplest way to create a value of our structure is: | |
| goku := Saiyan{ | |
| Name: "Goku", | |
| Power: 9000, | |
| } | |
| Note: The trailing , in the above structure is required. Without it, the compiler will give an error. You’ll appreciate the | |
| required consistency, especially if you’ve used a language or format that enforces the opposite. | |
| We don’t have to set all or even any of the fields. Both of these are valid: | |
| goku := Saiyan{} | |
| // or | |
| goku := Saiyan{Name: "Goku"} | |
| goku.Power = 9000 | |
| Just like unassigned variables have a zero value, so do fields. | |
| Furthermore, you can skip the field name and rely on the order of the field declarations (though for the sake of clarity, | |
| you should only do this for structures with few fields): | |
| goku := Saiyan{"Goku", 9000} | |
| What all of the above examples do is declare a variable goku and assign a value to it. | |
| Many times though, we don’t want a variable that is directly associated with our value but rather a variable that has a | |
| pointer to our value. A pointer is a memory address; it’s the location of where to find the actual value. It’s a level of | |
| indirection. Loosely, it’s the difference between being at a house and having directions to the house. | |
| Why do we want a pointer to the value, rather than the actual value? It comes down to the way Go passes arguments | |
| to a function: as copies. Knowing this, what does the following print? | |
| func main() { | |
| goku := Saiyan{"Goku", 9000} | |
| Super(goku) | |
| fmt.Println(goku.Power) | |
| } | |
| func Super(s Saiyan) { | |
| s.Power += 10000 | |
| } | |
| 28 | |
| The answer is 9000, not 19000. Why? Because Super made changes to a copy of our original goku value and thus, | |
| changes made in Super weren’t reflected in the caller. To make this work as you probably expect, we need to pass a | |
| pointer to our value: | |
| func main() { | |
| goku := &Saiyan{"Goku", 9000} | |
| Super(goku) | |
| fmt.Println(goku.Power) | |
| } | |
| func Super(s *Saiyan) { | |
| s.Power += 10000 | |
| } | |
| We made two changes. The first is the use of the & operator to get the address of our value (it’s called the address | |
| of operator). Next, we changed the type of parameter Super expects. It used to expect a value of type Saiyan but | |
| now expects an address of type *Saiyan, where *X means pointer to value of type X. There’s obviously some relation | |
| between the types Saiyan and *Saiyan, but they are two distinct types. | |
| Note that we’re still passing a copy of goku's value to Super it just so happens that goku's value has become an | |
| address. That copy is the same address as the original, which is what that indirection buys us. Think of it as copying | |
| the directions to a restaurant. What you have is a copy, but it still points to the same restaurant as the original. | |
| We can prove that it’s a copy by trying to change where it points to (not something you’d likely want to actually do): | |
| func main() { | |
| goku := &Saiyan{"Goku", 9000} | |
| Super(goku) | |
| fmt.Println(goku.Power) | |
| } | |
| func Super(s *Saiyan) { | |
| s = &Saiyan{"Gohan", 1000} | |
| } | |
| The above, once again, prints 9000. This is how many languages behave, including Ruby, Python, Java and C#. Go, | |
| and to some degree C#, simply make the fact visible. | |
| It should also be obvious that copying a pointer is going to be cheaper than copying a complex structure. On a 64bit | |
| machine, a pointer is 64 bits large. If we have a structure with many fields, creating copies can be expensive. The | |
| real value of pointers though is that they let you share values. Do we want Super to alter a copy of goku or alter the | |
| shared goku value itself? | |
| All this isn’t to say that you’ll always want a pointer. At the end of this chapter, after we’ve seen a bit more of what we | |
| can do with structures, we’ll reexamine the pointerversusvalue question. | |
| 29 | |
| Functions on Structures | |
| We can associate a method with a structure: | |
| type Saiyan struct { | |
| Name string | |
| Power int | |
| } | |
| func (s *Saiyan) Super() { | |
| s.Power += 10000 | |
| } | |
| In the above code, we say that the type *Saiyan is the receiver of the Super method. We call Super like so: | |
| goku := &Saiyan{"Goku", 9001} | |
| goku.Super() | |
| fmt.Println(goku.Power) // will print 19001 | |
| 30 | |
| Constructors | |
| Structures don’t have constructors. Instead, you create a function that returns an instance of the desired type (like a | |
| factory): | |
| func NewSaiyan(name string, power int) *Saiyan { | |
| return &Saiyan{ | |
| Name: name, | |
| Power: power, | |
| } | |
| } | |
| This pattern rubs a lot of developers the wrong way. On the one hand, it’s a pretty slight syntactical change; on the | |
| other, it does feel a little less compartmentalized. | |
| Our factory doesn’t have to return a pointer; this is absolutely valid: | |
| func NewSaiyan(name string, power int) Saiyan { | |
| return Saiyan{ | |
| Name: name, | |
| Power: power, | |
| } | |
| } | |
| 31 | |
| New | |
| Despite the lack of constructors, Go does have a builtin new function which is used to allocate the memory required | |
| by a type. The result of new(X) is the same as &X{}: | |
| goku := new(Saiyan) | |
| // same as | |
| goku := &Saiyan{} | |
| Which you use is up to you, but you’ll find that most people prefer the latter whenever they have fields to initialize, | |
| since it tends to be easier to read: | |
| goku := new(Saiyan) | |
| goku.name = "goku" | |
| goku.power = 9001 | |
| //vs | |
| goku := &Saiyan { | |
| name: "goku", | |
| power: 9000, | |
| } | |
| Whichever approach you choose, if you follow the factory pattern above, you can shield the rest of your code from | |
| knowing and worrying about any of the allocation details. | |
| 32 | |
| Fields of a Structure | |
| In the example that we’ve seen so far, Saiyan has two fields Name and Power of types string and int, respectively. | |
| Fields can be of any type – including other structures and types that we haven’t explored yet such as arrays, maps, | |
| interfaces and functions. | |
| For example, we could expand our definition of Saiyan: | |
| type Saiyan struct { | |
| Name string | |
| Power int | |
| Father *Saiyan | |
| } | |
| which we’d initialize via: | |
| gohan := &Saiyan{ | |
| Name: "Gohan", | |
| Power: 1000, | |
| Father: &Saiyan { | |
| Name: "Goku", | |
| Power: 9001, | |
| Father: nil, | |
| }, | |
| } | |
| 33 | |
| Composition | |
| Go supports composition, which is the act of including one structure into another. In some languages, this is called a | |
| trait or a mixin. Languages that don’t have an explicit composition mechanism can always do it the long way. In Java, | |
| there’s the possibility to extend structures with inheritance but, in a scenario where this is not an option, a mixin would | |
| be written like this: | |
| public class Person { | |
| private String name; | |
| public String getName() { | |
| return this.name; | |
| } | |
| } | |
| public class Saiyan { | |
| // Saiyan is said to have a person | |
| private Person person; | |
| // we forward the call to person | |
| public String getName() { | |
| return this.person.getName(); | |
| } | |
| ... | |
| } | |
| This can get pretty tedious. Every method of Person needs to be duplicated in Saiyan. Go avoids this tediousness: | |
| type Person struct { | |
| Name string | |
| } | |
| func (p *Person) Introduce() { | |
| fmt.Printf("Hi, I'm %s\n", p.Name) | |
| } | |
| type Saiyan struct { | |
| *Person | |
| Power int | |
| } | |
| // and to use it: | |
| goku := &Saiyan{ | |
| Person: &Person{"Goku"}, | |
| Power: 9001, | |
| 34 | |
| } | |
| goku.Introduce() | |
| The Saiyan structure has a field of type *Person. Because we didn’t give it an explicit field name, we can implicitly | |
| access the fields and functions of the composed type. However, the Go compiler did give it a field name, consider the | |
| perfectly valid: | |
| goku := &Saiyan{ | |
| Person: &Person{"Goku"}, | |
| } | |
| fmt.Println(goku.Name) | |
| fmt.Println(goku.Person.Name) | |
| Both of the above will print “Goku”. | |
| Is composition better than inheritance? Many people think that it’s a more robust way to share code. When using | |
| inheritance, your class is tightly coupled to your superclass and you end up focusing on hierarchy rather than behavior. | |
| Overloading | |
| While overloading isn’t specific to structures, it’s worth addressing. Simply, Go doesn’t support overloading. For this | |
| reason, you’ll see (and write) a lot of functions that look like Load, LoadById, LoadByName and so on. | |
| However, because implicit composition is really just a compiler trick, we can “overwrite” the functions of a composed | |
| type. For example, our Saiyan structure can have its own Introduce function: | |
| func (s *Saiyan) Introduce() { | |
| fmt.Printf("Hi, I'm %s. Ya!\n", s.Name) | |
| } | |
| The composed version is always available via s.Person.Introduce(). | |
| 35 | |
| Pointers versus Values | |
| As you write Go code, it’s natural to ask yourself should this be a value, or a pointer to a value? There are two pieces | |
| of good news. First, the answer is the same regardless of which of the following we’re talking about: | |
| • A local variable assignment | |
| • Field in a structure | |
| • Return value from a function | |
| • Parameters to a function | |
| • The receiver of a method | |
| Secondly, if you aren’t sure, use a pointer. | |
| As we already saw, passing values is a great way to make data immutable (changes that a function makes to it won’t | |
| be reflected in the calling code). Sometimes, this is the behavior that you’ll want but more often, it won’t be. | |
| Even if you don’t intend to change the data, consider the cost of creating a copy of large structures. Conversely, you | |
| might have small structures, say: | |
| type Point struct { | |
| X int | |
| Y int | |
| } | |
| In such cases, the cost of copying the structure is probably offset by being able to access X and Y directly, without any | |
| indirection. | |
| Again, these are all pretty subtle cases. Unless you’re iterating over thousands or possibly tens of thousands of such | |
| points, you wouldn’t notice a difference. | |
| 36 | |
| Before You Continue | |
| From a practical point of view, this chapter introduced structures, how to make an instance of a structure a receiver | |
| of a function, and added pointers to our existing knowledge of Go’s type system. The following chapters will build on | |
| what we know about structures as well as the inner workings that we’ve explored. | |
| 37 | |
| 38 | |
| Chapter 3 Maps, Arrays and Slices | |
| So far we’ve seen a number of simple types and structures. It’s now time to look at arrays, slices and maps. | |
| 39 | |
| Arrays | |
| If you come from Python, Ruby, Perl, JavaScript or PHP (and more), you’re probably used to programming with dynamic | |
| arrays. These are arrays that resize themselves as data is added to them. In Go, like many other languages, arrays | |
| are fixed. Declaring an array requires that we specify the size, and once the size is specified, it cannot grow: | |
| var scores [10]int | |
| scores[0] = 339 | |
| The above array can hold up to 10 scores using indexes scores[0] through scores[9]. Attempts to access an out | |
| of range index in the array will result in a compiler or runtime error. | |
| We can initialize the array with values: | |
| scores := [4]int{9001, 9333, 212, 33} | |
| We can use len to get the length of the array. range can be used to iterate over it: | |
| for index, value := range scores { | |
| } | |
| Arrays are efficient but rigid. We often don’t know the number of elements we’ll be dealing with upfront. For this, we | |
| turn to slices. | |
| 40 | |
| Slices | |
| In Go, you rarely, if ever, use arrays directly. Instead, you use slices. A slice is a lightweight structure that wraps and | |
| represents a portion of an array. There are a few ways to create a slice, and we’ll go over when to use which later on. | |
| The first is a slight variation on how we created an array: | |
| scores := []int{1,4,293,4,9} | |
| Unlike the array declaration, our slice isn’t declared with a length within the square brackets. To understand how the | |
| two are different, let’s see another way to create a slice, using make: | |
| scores := make([]int, 10) | |
| We use make instead of new because there’s more to creating a slice than just allocating the memory (which is what | |
| new does). Specifically, we have to allocate the memory for the underlying array and also initialize the slice. In the | |
| above, we initialize a slice with a length of 10 and a capacity of 10. The length is the size of the slice, the capacity is | |
| the size of the underlying array. Using make we can specify the two separately: | |
| scores := make([]int, 0, 10) | |
| This creates a slice with a length of 0 but with a capacity of 10. (If you’re paying attention, you’ll note that make and | |
| len are overloaded. Go is a language that, to the frustration of some, makes use of features which aren’t exposed for | |
| developers to use.) | |
| To better understand the interplay between length and capacity, let’s look at some examples: | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := make([]int, 0, 10) | |
| scores[7] = 9033 | |
| fmt.Println(scores) | |
| } | |
| Our first example crashes. Why? Because our slice has a length of 0. Yes, the underlying array has 10 elements, but | |
| we need to explicitly expand our slice in order to access those elements. One way to expand a slice is via append: | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := make([]int, 0, 10) | |
| scores = append(scores, 5) | |
| fmt.Println(scores) // prints [5] | |
| } | |
| But that changes the intent of our original code. Appending to a slice of length 0 will set the first element. For whatever | |
| reason, our crashing code wanted to set the element at index 7. To do this, we can reslice our slice: | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := make([]int, 0, 10) | |
| scores = scores[0:8] | |
| scores[7] = 9033 | |
| 41 | |
| fmt.Println(scores) | |
| } | |
| How large can we resize a slice? Up to its capacity which, in this case, is 10. You might be thinking this doesn’t actually | |
| solve the fixedlength issue of arrays. It turns out that append is pretty special. If the underlying array is full, it will | |
| create a new larger array and copy the values over (this is exactly how dynamic arrays work in PHP, Python, Ruby, | |
| JavaScript, …). This is why, in the example above that used append, we had to reassign the value returned by append | |
| to our scores variable: append might have created a new value if the original had no more space. | |
| If I told you that Go grew arrays with a 2x algorithm, can you guess what the following will output? | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := make([]int, 0, 5) | |
| c := cap(scores) | |
| fmt.Println(c) | |
| for i := 0; i < 25; i++ { | |
| scores = append(scores, i) | |
| // if our capacity has changed, | |
| // Go had to grow our array to accommodate the new data | |
| if cap(scores) != c { | |
| c = cap(scores) | |
| fmt.Println(c) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } | |
| The initial capacity of scores is 5. In order to hold 25 values, it’ll have to be expanded 3 times with a capacity of 10, | |
| 20 and finally 40. | |
| As a final example, consider: | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := make([]int, 5) | |
| scores = append(scores, 9332) | |
| fmt.Println(scores) | |
| } | |
| Here, the output is going to be [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 9332]. Maybe you thought it would be [9332, 0, 0, 0, 0]? | |
| To a human, that might seem logical. To a compiler, you’re telling it to append a value to a slice that already holds 5 | |
| values. | |
| Ultimately, there are four common ways to initialize a slice: | |
| names := []string{"leto", "jessica", "paul"} | |
| checks := make([]bool, 10) | |
| 42 | |
| var names []string | |
| scores := make([]int, 0, 20) | |
| When do you use which? The first one shouldn’t need much of an explanation. You use this when you know the values | |
| that you want in the array ahead of time. | |
| The second one is useful when you’ll be writing into specific indexes of a slice. For example: | |
| func extractPowers(saiyans []*Saiyan) []int { | |
| powers := make([]int, len(saiyans)) | |
| for index, saiyan := range saiyans { | |
| powers[index] = saiyan.Power | |
| } | |
| return powers | |
| } | |
| The third version is a nil slice and is used in conjunction with append, when the number of elements is unknown. | |
| The last version lets us specify an initial capacity; useful if we have a general idea of how many elements we’ll need. | |
| Even when you know the size, append can be used. It’s largely a matter of preference: | |
| func extractPowers(saiyans []*Saiyan) []int { | |
| powers := make([]int, 0, len(saiyans)) | |
| for _, saiyan := range saiyans { | |
| powers = append(powers, saiyan.Power) | |
| } | |
| return powers | |
| } | |
| Slices as wrappers to arrays is a powerful concept. Many languages have the concept of slicing an array. Both JavaScript | |
| and Ruby arrays have a slice method. You can also get a slice in Ruby by using [START..END] or in Python via [ | |
| START:END]. However, in these languages, a slice is actually a new array with the values of the original copied over. | |
| If we take Ruby, what’s the output of the following? | |
| scores = [1,2,3,4,5] | |
| slice = scores[2..4] | |
| slice[0] = 999 | |
| puts scores | |
| The answer is [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. That’s because slice is a completely new array with copies of values. Now, consider | |
| the Go equivalent: | |
| scores := []int{1,2,3,4,5} | |
| slice := scores[2:4] | |
| slice[0] = 999 | |
| fmt.Println(scores) | |
| 43 | |
| The [X:Y] syntax creates a slice of scores, starting from index 2 up until (but not including) index 4. However, unlike | |
| the Ruby example above, the Go code will produce an output of [1, 2, 999, 4, 5]. This is because our slice is | |
| really just a window into scores. | |
| This changes how you code. For example, a number of functions take a position parameter. In JavaScript, if we want | |
| to find the first space in a string (yes, slices work on strings too!) after the first five characters, we’d write: | |
| haystack = "the spice must flow"; | |
| console.log(haystack.indexOf(" ", 5)); | |
| In Go, we leverage slices: | |
| strings.Index(haystack[5:], " ") | |
| We can see from the above example, that [X:] is shorthand for from X to the end while [:X] is shorthand for from | |
| the start up until X. Unlike other languages, Go doesn’t support negative values. If we want all of the values of a slice | |
| except the last, we do: | |
| scores := []int{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} | |
| scores = scores[:len(scores)1] | |
| The above is the start of an efficient way to remove a value from an unsorted slice: | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := []int{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} | |
| scores = removeAtIndex(scores, 2) | |
| fmt.Println(scores) // [1 2 5 4] | |
| } | |
| // won't preserve order | |
| func removeAtIndex(source []int, index int) []int { | |
| lastIndex := len(source) 1 | |
| //swap the last value and the value we want to remove | |
| source[index], source[lastIndex] = source[lastIndex], source[index] | |
| return source[:lastIndex] | |
| } | |
| Finally, now that we know about slices, we can look at another commonly used builtin function: copy. copy is one | |
| of those functions that highlights how slices change the way we code. Normally, a method that copies values from | |
| one array to another has 5 parameters: source, sourceStart, count, destination and destinationStart. With | |
| slices, we only need two: | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "math/rand" | |
| "sort" | |
| ) | |
| 44 | |
| func main() { | |
| scores := make([]int, 100) | |
| for i := 0; i < 100; i++ { | |
| scores[i] = int(rand.Int31n(1000)) | |
| } | |
| sort.Ints(scores) | |
| worst := make([]int, 5) | |
| copy(worst, scores[:5]) | |
| fmt.Println(worst) | |
| } | |
| Take some time and play with the above code. Try variations. See what happens if you change copy to something like | |
| copy(worst[2:4], scores[:5]), or what if you try to copy more or less than 5 values into worst? | |
| 45 | |
| Maps | |
| Maps in Go are what other languages call hashtables or dictionaries. They work as you expect: you define a key and | |
| value, and can get, set and delete values from it. | |
| Maps, like slices, are created with the make function. Let’s look at an example: | |
| func main() { | |
| lookup := make(map[string]int) | |
| lookup["goku"] = 9001 | |
| power, exists := lookup["vegeta"] | |
| // prints 0, false | |
| // 0 is the default value for an integer | |
| fmt.Println(power, exists) | |
| } | |
| To get the number of keys, we use len. To remove a value based on its key, we use delete: | |
| // returns 1 | |
| total := len(lookup) | |
| // has no return, can be called on a nonexisting key | |
| delete(lookup, "goku") | |
| Maps grow dynamically. However, we can supply a second argument to make to set an initial size: | |
| lookup := make(map[string]int, 100) | |
| If you have some idea of how many keys your map will have, defining an initial size can help with performance. | |
| When you need a map as a field of a structure, you define it as: | |
| type Saiyan struct { | |
| Name string | |
| Friends map[string]*Saiyan | |
| } | |
| One way to initialize the above is via: | |
| goku := &Saiyan{ | |
| Name: "Goku", | |
| Friends: make(map[string]*Saiyan), | |
| } | |
| goku.Friends["krillin"] = ... //todo load or create Krillin | |
| There’s yet another way to declare and initialize values in Go. Like make, this approach is specific to maps and arrays. | |
| We can declare as a composite literal: | |
| 46 | |
| lookup := map[string]int{ | |
| "goku": 9001, | |
| "gohan": 2044, | |
| } | |
| We can iterate over a map using a for loop combined with the range keyword: | |
| for key, value := range lookup { | |
| ... | |
| } | |
| Iteration over maps isn’t ordered. Each iteration over a lookup will return the key value pair in a random order. | |
| 47 | |
| Pointers versus Values | |
| We finished Chapter 2 by looking at whether you should assign and pass pointers or values. We’ll now have this same | |
| conversation with respect to array and map values. Which of these should you use? | |
| a := make([]Saiyan, 10) | |
| //or | |
| b := make([]*Saiyan, 10) | |
| Many developers think that passing b to, or returning it from, a function is going to be more efficient. However, what’s | |
| being passed/returned is a copy of the slice, which itself is a reference. So with respect to passing/returning the slice | |
| itself, there’s no difference. | |
| Where you will see a difference is when you modify the values of a slice or map. At this point, the same logic that we | |
| saw in Chapter 2 applies. So the decision on whether to define an array of pointers versus an array of values comes | |
| down to how you use the individual values, not how you use the array or map itself. | |
| 48 | |
| Before You Continue | |
| Arrays and maps in Go work much like they do in other languages. If you’re used to dynamic arrays, there might be | |
| a small adjustment, but append should solve most of your discomfort. If we peek beyond the superficial syntax of | |
| arrays, we find slices. Slices are powerful and they have a surprisingly large impact on the clarity of your code. | |
| There are edge cases that we haven’t covered, but you’re not likely to run into them. And, if you do, hopefully the | |
| foundation we’ve built here will let you understand what’s going on. | |
| 49 | |
| 50 | |
| Chapter 4 Code Organization and Interfaces | |
| It’s now time to look at how to organize our code. | |
| 51 | |
| Packages | |
| To keep more complicated libraries and systems organized, we need to learn about packages. In Go, package names | |
| follow the directory structure of your Go workspace. If we were building a shopping system, we’d probably start with | |
| a package name “shopping” and put our source files in $GOPATH/src/shopping/. | |
| We don’t want to put everything inside this folder though. For example, maybe we want to isolate some database logic | |
| inside its own folder. To achieve this, we create a subfolder at $GOPATH/src/shopping/db. The package name of the | |
| files within this subfolder is simply db, but to access it from another package, including the shopping package, we | |
| need to import shopping/db. | |
| In other words, when you name a package, via the package keyword, you provide a single value, not a complete | |
| hierarchy (e.g., “shopping” or “db”). When you import a package, you specify the complete path. | |
| Let’s try it. Inside your Go workspace’s src folder (which we set up in Getting Started of the Introduction), create a | |
| new folder called shopping and a subfolder within it called db. | |
| Inside of shopping/db, create a file called db.go and add the following code: | |
| package db | |
| type Item struct { | |
| Price float64 | |
| } | |
| func LoadItem(id int) *Item { | |
| return &Item{ | |
| Price: 9.001, | |
| } | |
| } | |
| Notice that the name of the package is the same as the name of the folder. Also, obviously, we aren’t actually accessing | |
| the database. We’re just using this as an example to show how to organize code. | |
| Now, create a file called pricecheck.go inside of the main shopping folder. Its content is: | |
| package shopping | |
| import ( | |
| "shopping/db" | |
| ) | |
| func PriceCheck(itemId int) (float64, bool) { | |
| item := db.LoadItem(itemId) | |
| if item == nil { | |
| return 0, false | |
| } | |
| return item.Price, true | |
| 52 | |
| } | |
| It’s tempting to think that importing shopping/db is somehow special because we’re inside the shopping package/ | |
| folder already. In reality, you’re importing $GOPATH/src/shopping/db, which means you could just as easily import | |
| test/db so long as you had a package named db inside of your workspace’s src/test folder. | |
| If you’re building a package, you don’t need anything more than what we’ve seen. To build an executable, you still | |
| need a main. The way I prefer to do this is to create a subfolder called main inside of shopping with a file called | |
| main.go and the following content: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "shopping" | |
| "fmt" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| fmt.Println(shopping.PriceCheck(4343)) | |
| } | |
| You can now run your code by going into your shopping project and typing: | |
| go run main/main.go | |
| Cyclical Imports | |
| As you start writing more complex systems, you’re bound to run into cyclical imports. This happens when package A | |
| imports package B but package B imports package A (either directly or indirectly through another package). This is | |
| something the compiler won’t allow. | |
| Let’s change our shopping structure to cause the error. | |
| Move the Item definition from shopping/db/db.go into shopping/pricecheck.go. Your pricecheck.go file | |
| should now look like: | |
| package shopping | |
| import ( | |
| "shopping/db" | |
| ) | |
| type Item struct { | |
| Price float64 | |
| } | |
| func PriceCheck(itemId int) (float64, bool) { | |
| 53 | |
| item := db.LoadItem(itemId) | |
| if item == nil { | |
| return 0, false | |
| } | |
| return item.Price, true | |
| } | |
| If you try to run the code, you’ll get a couple of errors from db/db.go about Item being undefined. This makes | |
| sense. Item no longer exists in the db package; it’s been moved to the shopping package. We need to change | |
| shopping/db/db.go to: | |
| package db | |
| import ( | |
| "shopping" | |
| ) | |
| func LoadItem(id int) *shopping.Item { | |
| return &shopping.Item{ | |
| Price: 9.001, | |
| } | |
| } | |
| Now when you try to run the code, you’ll get a dreaded import cycle not allowed error. We solve this by introducing | |
| another package which contains shared structures. Your directory structure should look like: | |
| $GOPATH/src | |
| shopping | |
| pricecheck.go | |
| db | |
| db.go | |
| models | |
| item.go | |
| main | |
| main.go | |
| pricecheck.go will still import shopping/db, but db.go will now import shopping/models instead of shopping, | |
| thus breaking the cycle. Since we moved the shared Item structure to shopping/models/item.go, we need to | |
| change shopping/db/db.go to reference the Item structure from models package: | |
| package db | |
| import ( | |
| "shopping/models" | |
| ) | |
| 54 | |
| func LoadItem(id int) *models.Item { | |
| return &models.Item{ | |
| Price: 9.001, | |
| } | |
| } | |
| You’ll often need to share more than just models, so you might have other similar folder named utilities and such. | |
| The important rule about these shared packages is that they shouldn’t import anything from the shopping package or | |
| any subpackages. In a few sections, we’ll look at interfaces which can help us untangle these types of dependencies. | |
| Visibility | |
| Go uses a simple rule to define what types and functions are visible outside of a package. If the name of the type or | |
| function starts with an uppercase letter, it’s visible. If it starts with a lowercase letter, it isn’t. | |
| This also applies to structure fields. If a structure field name starts with a lowercase letter, only code within the same | |
| package will be able to access them. | |
| For example, if our items.go file had a function that looked like: | |
| func NewItem() *Item { | |
| // ... | |
| } | |
| it could be called via models.NewItem(). But if the function was named newItem, we wouldn’t be able to access it | |
| from a different package. | |
| Go ahead and change the name of the various functions, types and fields from the shopping code. For example, if | |
| you rename the Item's Price field to price, you should get an error. | |
| Package Management | |
| The go command we’ve been using to run and build has a get subcommand which is used to fetch thirdparty | |
| libraries. go get supports various protocols but for this example, we’ll be getting a library from Github, meaning, | |
| you’ll need git installed on your computer. | |
| Assuming you already have git installed, from a shell/command prompt, enter: | |
| go get github.com/mattn/gosqlite3 | |
| go get fetches the remote files and stores them in your workspace. Go ahead and check your $GOPATH/src. In | |
| addition to the shopping project that we created, you’ll now see a github.com folder. Within, you’ll see a mattn | |
| folder which contains a gosqlite3 folder. | |
| We just talked about how to import packages that live in our workspace. To use our newly gotten gosqlite3 package, | |
| we’d import it like so: | |
| import ( | |
| "github.com/mattn/gosqlite3" | |
| 55 | |
| ) | |
| I know this looks like a URL but in reality, it’ll simply import the gosqlite3 package which it expects to find in | |
| $GOPATH/src/github.com/mattn/gosqlite3. | |
| Dependency Management | |
| go get has a couple of other tricks up its sleeve. If we go get within a project, it’ll scan all the files, looking for | |
| imports to thirdparty libraries and will download them. | |
| In a way, our own source code becomes a Gemfile or | |
| package.json. | |
| If you call go get u it’ll update the packages (or you can update a specific package via go get u FULL_PACKAGE_NAME | |
| ). | |
| Eventually, you might find go get inadequate. For one thing, there’s no way to specify a revision, it always points to | |
| the master/head/trunk/default. This is an even larger problem if you have two projects needing different versions of | |
| the same library. | |
| To solve this, you can use a thirdparty dependency management tool. They are still young, but two promising ones | |
| are goop and godep. A more complete list is available at the gowiki. | |
| 56 | |
| Interfaces | |
| Interfaces are types that define a contract but not an implementation. Here’s an example: | |
| type Logger interface { | |
| Log(message string) | |
| } | |
| You might be wondering what purpose this could possibly serve. Interfaces help decouple your code from specific | |
| implementations. For example, we might have various types of loggers: | |
| type SqlLogger struct { ... } | |
| type ConsoleLogger struct { ... } | |
| type FileLogger struct { ... } | |
| Yet by programming against the interface, rather than these concrete implementations, we can easily change (and | |
| test) which we use without any impact to our code. | |
| How would you use one? Just like any other type, it could be a structure’s field: | |
| type Server struct { | |
| logger Logger | |
| } | |
| or a function parameter (or return value): | |
| func process(logger Logger) { | |
| logger.Log("hello!") | |
| } | |
| In a language like C# or Java, we have to be explicit when a class implements an interface: | |
| public class ConsoleLogger : Logger { | |
| public void Logger(message string) { | |
| Console.WriteLine(message) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| In Go, this happens implicitly. If your structure has a function name Log with a string parameter and no return value, | |
| then it can be used as a Logger. This cuts down on the verboseness of using interfaces: | |
| type ConsoleLogger struct {} | |
| func (l ConsoleLogger) Log(message string) { | |
| fmt.Println(message) | |
| } | |
| It also tends to promote small and focused interfaces. The standard library is full of interfaces. The io package has | |
| a handful of popular ones such as io.Reader, io.Writer, and io.Closer. If you write a function that expects a | |
| 57 | |
| parameter that you’ll only be calling Close() on, you absolutely should accept an io.Closer rather than whatever | |
| concrete type you’re using. | |
| Interfaces can also participate in composition. And, interfaces themselves can be composed of other interfaces. For | |
| example, io.ReadCloser is an interface composed of the io.Reader interface as well as the io.Closer interface. | |
| Finally, interfaces are commonly used to avoid cyclical imports. Since they don’t have implementations, they’ll have | |
| limited dependencies. | |
| 58 | |
| Before You Continue | |
| Ultimately, how you structure your code around Go’s workspace is something that you’ll only feel comfortable with after | |
| you’ve written a couple of nontrivial projects. What’s most important for you to remember is the tight relationship | |
| between package names and your directory structure (not just within a project, but within the entire workspace). | |
| The way Go handles visibility of types is straightforward and effective. It’s also consistent. There are a few things we | |
| haven’t looked at, such as constants and global variables but rest assured, their visibility is determined by the same | |
| naming rule. | |
| Finally, if you’re new to interfaces, it might take some time before you get a feel for them. However, the first time | |
| you see a function that expects something like io.Reader, you’ll find yourself thanking the author for not demanding | |
| more than he or she needed. | |
| 59 | |
| 60 | |
| Chapter 5 Tidbits | |
| In this chapter, we’ll talk about a miscellany of Go’s feature which didn’t quite fit anywhere else. | |
| 61 | |
| Error Handling | |
| Go’s preferred way to deal with errors is through return values, not exceptions. Consider the strconv.Atoi function | |
| which takes a string and tries to convert it to an integer: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "os" | |
| "strconv" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| if len(os.Args) != 2 { | |
| os.Exit(1) | |
| } | |
| n, err := strconv.Atoi(os.Args[1]) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| fmt.Println("not a valid number") | |
| } else { | |
| fmt.Println(n) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| You can create your own error type; the only requirement is that it fulfills the contract of the builtin error interface, | |
| which is: | |
| type error interface { | |
| Error() string | |
| } | |
| More commonly, we can create our own errors by importing the errors package and using it in the New function: | |
| import ( | |
| "errors" | |
| ) | |
| func process(count int) error { | |
| if count < 1 { | |
| return errors.New("Invalid count") | |
| } | |
| ... | |
| return nil | |
| 62 | |
| } | |
| There’s a common pattern in Go’s standard library of using error variables. For example, the io package has an EOF | |
| variable which is defined as: | |
| var EOF = errors.New("EOF") | |
| This is a package variable (it’s defined outside of a function) which is publicly accessible (uppercase first letter). Various | |
| functions can return this error, say when we’re reading from a file or STDIN. If it makes contextual sense, you should | |
| use this error, too. As consumers, we can use this singleton: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "io" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| var input int | |
| _, err := fmt.Scan(&input) | |
| if err == io.EOF { | |
| fmt.Println("no more input!") | |
| } | |
| } | |
| As a final note, Go does have panic and recover functions. panic is like throwing an exception while recover is like | |
| catch; they are rarely used. | |
| 63 | |
| Defer | |
| Even though Go has a garbage collector, some resources require that we explicitly release them. For example, we need | |
| to Close() files after we’re done with them. This sort of code is always dangerous. For one thing, as we’re writing | |
| a function, it’s easy to forget to Close something that we declared 10 lines up. For another, a function might have | |
| multiple return points. Go’s solution is the defer keyword: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "os" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| file, err := os.Open("a_file_to_read") | |
| if err != nil { | |
| fmt.Println(err) | |
| return | |
| } | |
| defer file.Close() | |
| // read the file | |
| } | |
| If you try to run the above code, you’ll probably get an error (the file doesn’t exist). The point is to show how defer | |
| works. Whatever you defer will be executed after the enclosing function (in this case main()) returns, even if it does | |
| so violently. This lets you release resources near where it’s initialized and takes care of multiple return points. | |
| 64 | |
| go fmt | |
| Most programs written in Go follow the same formatting rules, namely, a tab is used to indent and braces go on the | |
| same line as their statement. | |
| I know, you have your own style and you want to stick to it. That’s what I did for a long time, but I’m glad I eventually | |
| gave in. A big reason for this is the go fmt command. It’s easy to use and authoritative (so no one argues over | |
| meaningless preferences). | |
| When you’re inside a project, you can apply the formatting rule to it and all subprojects via: | |
| go fmt ./... | |
| Give it a try. It does more than indent your code; it also aligns field declarations and alphabetically orders imports. | |
| 65 | |
| Initialized If | |
| Go supports a slightly modified ifstatement, one where a value can be initiated prior to the condition being evaluated: | |
| if x := 10; count > x { | |
| ... | |
| } | |
| That’s a pretty silly example. More realistically, you might do something like: | |
| if err := process(); err != nil { | |
| return err | |
| } | |
| Interestingly, while the values aren’t available outside the ifstatement, they are available inside any else if or else. | |
| 66 | |
| Empty Interface and Conversions | |
| In most objectoriented languages, a builtin base class, often named object, is the superclass for all other classes. | |
| Go, having no inheritance, doesn’t have such a superclass. What it does have is an empty interface with no methods: | |
| interface{}. Since every type implements all 0 of the empty interface’s methods, and since interfaces are implicitly | |
| implemented, every type fulfills the contract of the empty interface. | |
| If we wanted to, we could write an add function with the following signature: | |
| func add(a interface{}, b interface{}) interface{} { | |
| ... | |
| } | |
| To convert an interface variable to an explicit type, you use .(TYPE): | |
| return a.(int) + b.(int) | |
| Note that if the underlying type is not int, the above will result in an error. | |
| You also have access to a powerful type switch: | |
| switch a.(type) { | |
| case int: | |
| fmt.Printf("a is now an int and equals %d\n", a) | |
| case bool, string: | |
| // ... | |
| default: | |
| // ... | |
| } | |
| You’ll see and probably use the empty interface more than you might first expect. Admittedly, it won’t result in clean | |
| code. Converting values back and forth is ugly and dangerous but sometimes, in a static language, it’s the only choice. | |
| 67 | |
| Strings and Byte Arrays | |
| Strings and byte arrays are closely related. We can easily convert one to the other: | |
| stra := "the spice must flow" | |
| byts := []byte(stra) | |
| strb := string(byts) | |
| In fact, this way of converting is common across various types as well. Some functions explicitly expect an int32 or | |
| an int64 or their unsigned counterparts. You might find yourself having to do things like: | |
| int64(count) | |
| Still, when it comes to bytes and strings, it’s probably something you’ll end up doing often. Do note that when you use | |
| []byte(X) or string(X), you’re creating a copy of the data. This is necessary because strings are immutable. | |
| Strings are made of runes which are unicode code points. If you take the length of a string, you might not get what | |
| you expect. The following prints 3: | |
| fmt.Println(len("")) | |
| If you iterate over a string using range, you’ll get runes, not bytes. Of course, when you turn a string into a []byte | |
| you’ll get the correct data. | |
| 68 | |
| Function Type | |
| Functions are firstclass types: | |
| type Add func(a int, b int) int | |
| which can then be used anywhere – as a field type, as a parameter, as a return value. | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| ) | |
| type Add func(a int, b int) int | |
| func main() { | |
| fmt.Println(process(func(a int, b int) int{ | |
| return a + b | |
| })) | |
| } | |
| func process(adder Add) int { | |
| return adder(1, 2) | |
| } | |
| Using functions like this can help decouple code from specific implementations much like we achieve with interfaces. | |
| 69 | |
| Before You Continue | |
| We looked at various aspects of programming with Go. Most notably, we saw how error handling behaves and how to | |
| release resources such as connections and open files. Many people dislike Go’s approach to error handling. It can feel | |
| like a step backwards. Sometimes, I agree. Yet, I also find that it results in code that’s easier to follow. defer is an | |
| unusual but practical approach to resource management. In fact, it isn’t tied to resource management only. You can | |
| use defer for any purpose, such as logging when a function exits. | |
| Certainly, we haven’t looked at all of the tidbits Go has to offer. But you should be feeling comfortable enough to tackle | |
| whatever you come across. | |
| 70 | |
| Chapter 6 Concurrency | |
| Go is often described as a concurrentfriendly language. The reason for this is that it provides a simple syntax over | |
| two powerful mechanisms: goroutines and channels. | |
| 71 | |
| Goroutines | |
| A goroutine is similar to a thread, but it is scheduled by Go, not the OS. Code that runs in a goroutine can run | |
| concurrently with other code. Let’s look at an example: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "time" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| fmt.Println("start") | |
| go process() | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 10) // this is bad, don't do this! | |
| fmt.Println("done") | |
| } | |
| func process() { | |
| fmt.Println("processing") | |
| } | |
| There are a few interesting things going on here, but the most important is how we start a goroutine. We simply use | |
| the go keyword followed by the function we want to execute. If we just want to run a bit of code, such as the above, | |
| we can use an anonymous function. Do note that anonymous functions aren’t only used with goroutines, however. | |
| go func() { | |
| fmt.Println("processing") | |
| }() | |
| Goroutines are easy to create and have little overhead. Multiple goroutines will end up running on the same underlying | |
| OS thread. This is often called an M:N threading model because we have M application threads (goroutines) running | |
| on N OS threads. The result is that a goroutine has a fraction of overhead (a few KB) than OS threads. On modern | |
| hardware, it’s possible to have millions of goroutines. | |
| Furthermore, the complexity of mapping and scheduling is hidden. We just say this code should run concurrently and | |
| let Go worry about making it happen. | |
| If we go back to our example, you’ll notice that we had to Sleep for a few milliseconds. That’s because the main | |
| process exits before the goroutine gets a chance to execute (the process doesn’t wait until all goroutines are finished | |
| before exiting). To solve this, we need to coordinate our code. | |
| 72 | |
| Synchronization | |
| Creating goroutines is trivial, and they are so cheap that we can start many; however, concurrent code needs to be | |
| coordinated. To help with this problem, Go provides channels. Before we look at channels, I think it’s important to | |
| understand a little bit about the basics of concurrent programming. | |
| Writing concurrent code requires that you pay specific attention to where and how you read and write values. In some | |
| ways, it’s like programming without a garbage collector – it requires that you think about your data from a new angle, | |
| always watchful for possible danger. Consider: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "time" | |
| ) | |
| var counter = 0 | |
| func main() { | |
| for i := 0; i < 20; i++ { | |
| go incr() | |
| } | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 10) | |
| } | |
| func incr() { | |
| counter++ | |
| fmt.Println(counter) | |
| } | |
| What do you think the output will be? | |
| If you think the output is 1, 2, ... 20 you’re both right and wrong. It’s true that if you run the above code, you’ll | |
| sometimes get that output. However, the reality is that the behavior is undefined. Why? Because we potentially have | |
| multiple (two in this case) goroutines writing to the same variable, counter, at the same time. Or, just as bad, one | |
| goroutine would be reading counter while another writes to it. | |
| Is that really a danger? Yes, absolutely. counter++ might seem like a simple line of code, but it actually gets broken | |
| down into multiple assembly statements – the exact nature is dependent on the platform that you’re running. If you run | |
| this example, you’ll see that very often the numbers are printed in a weird order, and/or numbers are duplicated/missing. | |
| There are worse possibilities too, such as system crashes or accessing an arbitrary piece of data and incrementing it! | |
| The only concurrent thing you can safely do to a variable is to read from it. You can have as many readers as you want, | |
| but writes need to be synchronized. There are various ways to do this, including using some truly atomic operations | |
| that rely on special CPU instructions. However, the most common approach is to use a mutex: | |
| 73 | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "time" | |
| "sync" | |
| ) | |
| var ( | |
| counter = 0 | |
| lock sync.Mutex | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| for i := 0; i < 20; i++ { | |
| go incr() | |
| } | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 10) | |
| } | |
| func incr() { | |
| lock.Lock() | |
| defer lock.Unlock() | |
| counter++ | |
| fmt.Println(counter) | |
| } | |
| A mutex serializes access to the code under lock. The reason we simply define our lock as lock sync.Mutex is because | |
| the default value of a sync.Mutex is unlocked. | |
| Seems simple enough? The example above is deceptive. There’s a whole class of serious bugs that can arise when | |
| doing concurrent programming. First of all, it isn’t always so obvious what code needs to be protected. While it might | |
| be tempting to use coarse locks (locks that cover a large amount of code), that undermines the very reason we’re doing | |
| concurrent programming in the first place. We generally want fine locks; else, we end up with a tenlane highway that | |
| suddenly turns into a onelane road. | |
| The other problem has to do with deadlocks. With a single lock, this isn’t a problem, but if you’re using two or more | |
| locks around the same code, it’s dangerously easy to have situations where goroutineA holds lockA but needs access | |
| to lockB, while goroutineB holds lockB but needs access to lockA. | |
| It actually is possible to deadlock with a single lock, if we forget to release it. This isn’t as dangerous as a multilock | |
| deadlock (because those are really tough to spot), but just so you can see what happens, try running: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| 74 | |
| "time" | |
| "sync" | |
| ) | |
| var ( | |
| lock sync.Mutex | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| go func() { lock.Lock() }() | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 10) | |
| lock.Lock() | |
| } | |
| There’s more to concurrent programming than what we’ve seen so far. For one thing, there’s another common mutex | |
| called a readwrite mutex. This exposes two locking functions: one to lock for reading and one to lock for writing. | |
| This distinction allows multiple simultaneous readers while ensuring that writing is exclusive. In Go, sync.RWMutex | |
| is such a lock. In addition to the Lock and Unlock methods of a sync.Mutex, it also exposes RLock and RUnlock | |
| methods; where R stands for Read. While readwrite mutexes are commonly used, they place an additional burden on | |
| developers: we must now pay attention to not only when we’re accessing data, but also how. | |
| Furthermore, part of concurrent programming isn’t so much about serializing access across the narrowest possible piece | |
| of code; it’s also about coordinating multiple goroutines. For example, sleeping for 10 milliseconds isn’t a particularly | |
| elegant solution. What if a goroutine takes more than 10 milliseconds? What if it takes less and we’re just wasting | |
| cycles? Also, what if instead of just waiting for goroutines to finish, we want to tell one hey, I have new data for you | |
| to process!? | |
| These are all things that are doable without channels. Certainly for simpler cases, I believe you should use primitives | |
| such as sync.Mutex and sync.RWMutex, but as we’ll see in the next section, channels aim at making concurrent | |
| programming cleaner and less errorprone. | |
| 75 | |
| Channels | |
| The challenge with concurrent programming stems from sharing data. If your goroutines share no data, you needn’t | |
| worry about synchronizing them. That isn’t an option for all systems, however. In fact, many systems are built with | |
| the exact opposite goal in mind: to share data across multiple requests. An inmemory cache or a database, are good | |
| examples of this. This is becoming an increasingly common reality. | |
| Channels help make concurrent programming saner by taking shared data out of the picture. A channel is a commu | |
| nication pipe between goroutines which is used to pass data. In other words, a goroutine that has data can pass it to | |
| another goroutine via a channel. The result is that, at any point in time, only one goroutine has access to the data. | |
| A channel, like everything else, has a type. This is the type of data that we’ll be passing through our channel. For | |
| example, to create a channel which can be used to pass an integer around, we’d do: | |
| c := make(chan int) | |
| The type of this channel is chan int. Therefore, to pass this channel to a function, our signature looks like: | |
| func worker(c chan int) { ... } | |
| Channels support two operations: receiving and sending. We send to a channel by doing: | |
| CHANNEL < DATA | |
| and receive from one by doing | |
| VAR := <CHANNEL | |
| The arrow points in the direction that data flows. When sending, the data flows into the channel. When receiving, the | |
| data flows out of the channel. | |
| The final thing to know before we look at our first example is that receiving and sending to and from a channel is | |
| blocking. That is, when we receive from a channel, execution of the goroutine won’t continue until data is available. | |
| Similarly, when we send to a channel, execution won’t continue until the data is received. | |
| Consider a system with incoming data that we want to handle in separate goroutines. This is a common requirement. | |
| If we did our dataintensive processing on the goroutine which accepts the incoming data, we’d risk timing out clients. | |
| First, we’ll write our worker. This could be a simple function, but I’ll make it part of a structure since we haven’t seen | |
| goroutines used like this before: | |
| type Worker struct { | |
| id int | |
| } | |
| func (w Worker) process(c chan int) { | |
| for { | |
| data := <c | |
| fmt.Printf("worker %d got %d\n", w.id, data) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| 76 | |
| Our worker is simple. It waits until data is available then “processes” it. Dutifully, it does this in a loop, forever waiting | |
| for more data to process. | |
| To use this, the first thing we’d do is start some workers: | |
| c := make(chan int) | |
| for i := 0; i < 5; i++ { | |
| worker := &Worker{id: i} | |
| go worker.process(c) | |
| } | |
| And then we can give them some work: | |
| for { | |
| c < rand.Int() | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 50) | |
| } | |
| Here’s the complete code to make it run: | |
| package main | |
| import ( | |
| "fmt" | |
| "time" | |
| "math/rand" | |
| ) | |
| func main() { | |
| c := make(chan int) | |
| for i := 0; i < 5; i++ { | |
| worker := &Worker{id: i} | |
| go worker.process(c) | |
| } | |
| for { | |
| c < rand.Int() | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 50) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| type Worker struct { | |
| id int | |
| } | |
| func (w *Worker) process(c chan int) { | |
| 77 | |
| for { | |
| data := <c | |
| fmt.Printf("worker %d got %d\n", w.id, data) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| We don’t know which worker is going to get what data. What we do know, what Go guarantees, is that the data we | |
| send to a channel will only be received by a single receiver. | |
| Notice that the only shared state is the channel, which we can safely receive from and send to concurrently. Channels | |
| provide all of the synchronization code we need and also ensure that, at any given time, only one goroutine has access | |
| to a specific piece of data. | |
| Buffered Channels | |
| Given the above code, what happens if we have more data coming in than we can handle? You can simulate this by | |
| changing the worker to sleep after it has received data: | |
| for { | |
| data := <c | |
| fmt.Printf("worker %d got %d\n", w.id, data) | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 500) | |
| } | |
| What’s happening is that our main code, the one that accepts the user’s incoming data (which we just simulated with | |
| a random number generator) is blocking as it sends to the channel because no receiver is available. | |
| In cases where you need high guarantees that the data is being processed, you probably will want to start blocking the | |
| client. In other cases, you might be willing to loosen those guarantees. There are a few popular strategies to do this. | |
| The first is to buffer the data. If no worker is available, we want to temporarily store the data in some sort of queue. | |
| Channels have this buffering capability builtin. When we created our channel with make, we can give our channel a | |
| length: | |
| c := make(chan int, 100) | |
| You can make this change, but you’ll notice that the processing is still choppy. Buffered channels don’t add more | |
| capacity; they merely provide a queue for pending work and a good way to deal with a sudden spike. In our example, | |
| we’re continuously pushing more data than our workers can handle. | |
| Nevertheless, we can get a sense what the buffered channel is, in fact, buffering by looking at the channel’s len: | |
| for { | |
| c < rand.Int() | |
| fmt.Println(len(c)) | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 50) | |
| } | |
| You can see that it grows and grows until it fills up, at which point sending to our channel start to block again. | |
| 78 | |
| Select | |
| Even with buffering, there comes a point where we need to start dropping messages. We can’t use up an infinite | |
| amount of memory hoping a worker frees up. For this, we use Go’s select. | |
| Syntactically, select looks a bit like a switch. With it, we can provide code for when the channel isn’t available to send | |
| to. First, let’s remove our channel’s buffering so that we can clearly see how select works: | |
| c := make(chan int) | |
| Next, we change our for loop: | |
| for { | |
| select { | |
| case c < rand.Int(): | |
| //optional code here | |
| default: | |
| //this can be left empty to silently drop the data | |
| fmt.Println("dropped") | |
| } | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 50) | |
| } | |
| We’re pushing out 20 messages per second, but our workers can only handle 10 per second; thus, half the messages | |
| get dropped. | |
| This is only the start of what we can accomplish with select. A main purpose of select is to manage multiple channels. | |
| Given multiple channels, select will block until the first one becomes available. If no channel is available, default is | |
| executed if one is provided. A channel is randomly picked when multiple are available. | |
| It’s hard to come up with a simple example that demonstrates this behavior as it’s a fairly advanced feature. The next | |
| section might help illustrate this though. | |
| Timeout | |
| We’ve looked at buffering messages as well as simply dropping them. Another popular option is to timeout. We’re | |
| willing to block for some time, but not forever. This is also something easy to achieve in Go. Admittedly, the syntax | |
| might be hard to follow but it’s such a neat and useful feature that I couldn’t leave it out. | |
| To block for a maximum amount of time, we can use the time.After function. Let’s look at it then try to peek beyond | |
| the magic. To use this, our sender becomes: | |
| for { | |
| select { | |
| case c < rand.Int(): | |
| case <time.After(time.Millisecond * 100): | |
| fmt.Println("timed out") | |
| } | |
| 79 | |
| time.Sleep(time.Millisecond * 50) | |
| } | |
| time.After returns a channel, so we can select from it. The channel is written to after the specified time expires. | |
| That’s it. There’s nothing more magical than that. If you’re curious, here’s what an implementation of after could | |
| look like: | |
| func after(d time.Duration) chan bool { | |
| c := make(chan bool) | |
| go func() { | |
| time.Sleep(d) | |
| c < true | |
| }() | |
| return c | |
| } | |
| Back to our select, there are a couple of things to play with. First, what happens if you add the default case back? | |
| Can you guess? Try it. If you aren’t sure what’s going on, remember that default fires immediately if no channel is | |
| available. | |
| Also, time.After is a channel of type chan time.Time. In the above example, we simply discard the value that was | |
| sent to the channel. If you want though, you can receive it: | |
| case t := <time.After(time.Millisecond * 100): | |
| fmt.Println("timed out at", t) | |
| Pay close attention to our select. Notice that we’re sending to c but receiving from time.After. select works the | |
| same regardless of whether we’re receiving from, sending to, or any combination of channels: | |
| • The first available channel is chosen. | |
| • If multiple channels are available, one is randomly picked. | |
| • If no channel is available, the default case is executed. | |
| • If there’s no default, select blocks. | |
| Finally, it’s common to see a select inside a for. Consider: | |
| for { | |
| select { | |
| case data := <c: | |
| fmt.Printf("worker %d got %d\n", w.id, data) | |
| case <time.After(time.Millisecond * 10): | |
| fmt.Println("Break time") | |
| time.Sleep(time.Second) | |
| } | |
| } | |
| 80 | |
| Before You Continue | |
| If you’re new to the world of concurrent programming, it might all seem rather overwhelming. It categorically demands | |
| considerably more attention and care. Go aims to make it easier. | |
| Goroutines effectively abstract what’s needed to run concurrent code. Channels help eliminate some serious bugs that | |
| can happen when data is shared by eliminating the sharing of data. This doesn’t just eliminate bugs, but it changes | |
| how one approaches concurrent programming. You start to think about concurrency with respect to message passing, | |
| rather than dangerous areas of code. | |
| Having said that, I still make extensive use of the various synchronization primitives found in the sync and sync/ | |
| atomic packages. I think it’s important to be comfortable with both. I encourage you to first focus on channels, but | |
| when you see a simple example that needs a shortlived lock, consider using a mutex or readwrite mutex. | |
| 81 | |
| 82 | |
| Conclusion | |
| I recently heard Go described as a boring language. Boring because it’s easy to learn, easy to write and, most | |
| importantly, easy to read. Perhaps, I did this reality a disservice. We did spend three chapters talking about types and | |
| how to declare variables after all. | |
| If you have a background in a statically typed language, much of what we saw was probably, at best, a refresher. That | |
| Go makes pointers visible and that slices are thin wrappers around arrays probably isn’t overwhelming to seasoned | |
| Java or C# developers. | |
| If you’ve mostly been making use of dynamic languages, you might feel a little different. It is a fair bit to learn. Not | |
| least of which is the various syntax around declaration and initialization. Despite being a fan of Go, I find that for all the | |
| progress towards simplicity, there’s something less than simple about it. Still, it comes down to some basic rules (like | |
| you can only declare variable once and := does declare the variable) and fundamental understanding (like new(X) or | |
| &X{} only allocate memory, but slices, maps and channels require more initialization and thus, make). | |
| Beyond this, Go gives us a simple but effective way to organize our code. Interfaces, returnbased error handling, | |
| defer for resource management and a simple way to achieve composition. | |
| Last but not least is the builtin support for concurrency. There’s little to say about goroutines other than they’re | |
| effective and simple (simple to use anyway). It’s a good abstraction. Channels are more complicated. I always think | |
| it’s important to understand basics before using highlevel wrappers. I do think learning about concurrent programming | |
| without channels is useful. Still, channels are implemented in a way that, to me, doesn’t feel quite like a simple | |
| abstraction. They are almost their own fundamental building block. I say this because they change how you write and | |
| think about concurrent programming. Given how hard concurrent programming can be, that is definitely a good thing. | |
| 83 | |