3 ms·
> Wherein lies the aforementioned guarantee? I think you should re-read what I wrote. You seem to be upset that I did not solve everyone's problem with sync.Po
by ignoramous 2y ago
> Wherein lies the aforementioned guarantee?
I think you should re-read what I wrote. You seem to be upset that I did not solve everyone's problem with sync.Pool with my 10 liner (when I claimed no such thing).
One could define a new "Pool[T]" type (extending sync.Pool) to get these guarantees
Meant... One could define / extend sync.Pool to get those guarantees [for their custom types] ... Followed by an example for int & bool types (which are copied around, so pooling is ineffective like you say, but my intention was to show how sync.Pool could be extended, and nothing much else).
- 9rx 2y ago> I think you should re-read what I wrote. You "forgot" to copy the colon from the original statement. A curious exclusion given the semantic meaning it carries. Were you hoping I didn't read your original comment and wouldn't notice? > You seem to be upset How could one ever possibly become upset on an internet forum? Even if for some bizarre and unlikely reason you were on the path to becoming upset, you'd turn off the computer long before ever becoming upset. There is absolutely no reason to use this tool if it isn't providing joy. > One could define / extend sync.Pool to get those guarantees [for their custom types] ... What audience would be interested in this? Is there anyone who understands all the intricacies of sync.Pool but doesn't know how to define types or how to write functions?
- ignoramous 2y ago> You "forgot" to copy the colon from the original statement. You got me!