3 ms·
My two Golang pet peeves, not very important either: -still no math.round WTF? -make() should be syntax and not this quasi-function that takes this vast array
by jnordwick 10y ago
My two Golang pet peeves, not very important either:
-still no math.round WTF?
-make() should be syntax and not this quasi-function that takes this vast array of argument types, and while you're at it, you should just rename it `new`, because that's what it is.
- Vendan 10y agonote that new() already exists in the language.
- jnordwick 10y agoYes, and make() is completely superfluous. make() and new() can be completely rolled into one piece of syntax without ambiguity because they are the same thing.
- howeman 10y agohttps://godoc.org/github.com/gonum/floats#Round https://godoc.org/github.com/gonum/floats#Round
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jnordwick 10y agoIs gonum part of Golang? I don't think I should have to pull in an entire library just to get a working round implementation.
- petre 10y agoHaha, no number rounding function/method in the standard math lib? And I thought Dlang missing a BigFloat type was a deal breaker.