Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
blog.percywegmann.com | ||
| | | | |
wingolog.org
|
|
| | | | | wingolog: article: accessing webassembly reference-typed arrays from c++ | |
| | | | |
konradreiche.com
|
|
| | | | | Writing a generic protobuf writer in Go is straightforward. We simply use proto.Marshal with the protobuf message because proto.Marshal expects the proto.Message interface, which all generated protobuf messages implement. However, when it comes to reading serialized protobuf data into a specific Go type, historically, we had to specify the type explicitly: var post pb.Post if err := proto.Unmarshal(b, &post); err != nil { return nil, err } This approach is clear and explicit: what you see is what you get. But what if you need a more generic solution? You might encounter a scenario similar to mine: a cache abstraction designed to handle different kinds of protobuf messages generically. My initial attempt looked like this: | |
| | | | |
lukesingham.com
|
|
| | | | | These are my summary notes of 'A Tour of Go' - which is meant for people who are familiar with programming to have a quick tour | |
| | | | |
vlad.website
|
|
| | | Lately, I've been working on a spreadsheet program. I think spreadsheets are cool and I often need to use them, but the current software could be a lot better. :) You basically have to choose between impossibly overcomplicated Excel or an army of Open Source clones that don't learn from its mistakes. Anyway, the really fun part about working on spreadsheet software is that you have to implement a programming language for it! I'm referring to the formula language we all know and love: SUM(A1:B3, 150) and all that. | ||
