When creating your interfaces, all this is easy to understand. It's when you are using imports (even from the standard library), is when it gets hard. There is no clear way to tell (that I'm aware of) what interface a stuct implements without digging through the code finding what functions an interface implements, and then checking if the struct you want to use implements those same ones
@seand76034 ай бұрын
It drives me nuts. Rust spoiled me :)
@kevinryan29923 ай бұрын
The go language server (gopls) does implement this functionality, however I do agree if you are just reading code without the use of an external tool, implicit interfaces are definitely not as nice as explicit
@EHBRod139 күн бұрын
Implicit interfaces drove me away from Go. It made understanding the large code base at my old job really difficult.
@danielrosenthal74805 ай бұрын
I've been struggling with how interfaces work for a while now and I think this video finally got it to click for me. Thank you.
@FloWoelki5 ай бұрын
I am glad to hear that!
@sval40207 ай бұрын
Hey Flo, just wanted to say how much I like your teaching style. Your videos are great! Please cover more advanced Golang topics such as Go concurrency patterns and best practices. Thank you!
@FloWoelki7 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for the great feedback! Go Concurrency patterns is definitely a video on my todo list :)
@davidmolizane3 ай бұрын
Bro everything in this video is amazing, the quality of the explanation, camera, audio and code examples, thanks for this excelente tutorial
@FloWoelki3 ай бұрын
Thank you for your comment and for watching the video! Glad I could help you :)
@nanonkay56696 ай бұрын
The kind of thinking of interfaces being a contract is not wrong, but kinda abstract. Think of an interface as a membership, named after whatever you decide to call your interface, in this case "Shape". For any struct/class that wants to have that membership, they have to implement the functions described in that interface, much like how you may want to meet certain criteria to have a gym membership. So for Circle and Rectangle, they have to implement all Shape functions/methods to have a Shape membership. This is convenient because perhaps there could be a function somewhere that only takes Shape members to operate on them (calculateArea), and if Circle and Rectangle are Shape members, that function can operate on either one of them
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
That's also a nice way to see it, except that I can always have a membership of something without meeting any requirement or using the membership :D
@guru_tz2 ай бұрын
Damn man, that was a direct hit. So clear and tqsm
@user-oz4tb3 ай бұрын
Ahh, such a lovely explanation! Finally clicked for me how and why Error interface works!
@FloWoelki3 ай бұрын
Nice to hear that! So awesome that you found it helpful :)
@楊宏-l6t6 ай бұрын
This teacher is so logical, thanks!!
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
Thank you :D
@khaliddaoud2 ай бұрын
I'm new to Go and your video's help me a lot, thanks 🙏. Keep it up 💪
@FloWoelki2 ай бұрын
Glad to hear it! Thank you so much :)
@SunilShahu174 ай бұрын
Why don't we embed interface into structures? For example, If you intend to make a structure implement an interface, simply add "implement interface_name" in structure definition. That will add clarity in code. Right?
@yinetoyi5 ай бұрын
Thanks for the video, the explanations are easy to understand. One thing I didn't fully get is how by passing the CalculationError{msg: "Invalid input"} struct instance on the performCalculation() the performCalculation() would use the Error() method of the CalculationError struct, I would've thought that we would need to call the Error() method of the struct but this is not the case, so what I gather with this is that the compiler implicitly deduces that since we are returning a value of type error and because we're using the CalculationError{msg: "Invalid input value"} struct instance as its return value it "sees" that this struct instance has a method that implements the Error() function and hence it uses it. So this is some sort of implicit default method for specific type returns or something like that, I honestly don't no how to refer to this behavior, I had no knowledge if this behavior but is good to know. Thanks again for putting this video together.
@codingchannel62633 ай бұрын
error interface is already defined in Go's standard library. We don't need to define it ourselves; we only need to implement it. We don't need to write err.Error() explicitly. when we do fmt.Printf(error instance/objects of error struct ) In most cases, you don't need to call the Error() method explicitly. Go will call it automatically in certain situations: When you use fmt.Println() or fmt.Printf() with an error value. When you convert an error to a string (e.g., with err.Error() or string(err)).
@anuragraut510119 күн бұрын
5:00 , you said if you added a new method in the shape interface , then the rectangle interface no longer implements it. That is in order for a struct to implement the interface it should implement all the methods of that interface . But Go interfaces are loosely coupled right ?a struct can implement part of the interface . I tried out the code to confirm it and the code still works . Am i interpreting it wrong or missing something here?
@MuhammadFahreza4 күн бұрын
Nice video, I was wondering what is the theme and IDE? it looks way more cleaner that my typical Goland. Thanks in advance!
@perajarac2 күн бұрын
Great video!
@FloWoelkiКүн бұрын
Thank you, and glad you enjoyed it! :)
@meka499627 күн бұрын
Amazing! Thank you
@cacadu9715 ай бұрын
I've never seen someone explain something that clearly
@FloWoelki5 ай бұрын
Wow, thank you! :)
@chrisritter93446 ай бұрын
This was great!
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
I am glad you've liked it :)
@adigunolamide32305 ай бұрын
Your videos are amazing.
@FloWoelki5 ай бұрын
Thank you so much! :)
@donzepe6 ай бұрын
Nice explanation my friend!
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
Thank you! Cheers!
@melihdev3 ай бұрын
Can you explain the layered architecture in go?
@himanshubanerji8800Ай бұрын
I want to go back to Java already, this Go gets more and more complex as I learn
@costathoughts2 күн бұрын
I really look Go as an easy and readable language, because once you have touch with OOP, Aspect, and other suff famous on java world everything is possible to overcome
@rakeshfalak51185 күн бұрын
Awesome!
@karlrichardson75485 ай бұрын
Thanks This helped a lot.
@FloWoelki5 ай бұрын
I am glad it helped :)
@falanges53016 ай бұрын
Thanks so much 💝 this really helped me, keep on goin
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
You're welcome 😊
@anon_y_mousse5 ай бұрын
As far as I've understood it, they're basically like a class in C++ where everything is virtual. Generally we'd refer to that as an abstract class. That and error codes instead of exceptions I copied as features for my own language. I don't like that they use it as a sort of replacement for genericity syntax though. It's basically another void pointer, but with the requirements for casting turned 180 degrees. So better, but not good enough in my opinion. Looks like you do both Rust and Go, but perhaps you should add more languages to your repertoire like plain C and demonstrate how different constructs work at a fundamental level by converting them to C.
@sammyj294 ай бұрын
Great stuff! Subbed
@FloWoelki4 ай бұрын
Much appreciated! :)
@nullPointer0x07 ай бұрын
Nice explanation. Thanks. Subscribed.
@FloWoelki7 ай бұрын
Awesome, thank you!
@nikital26086 ай бұрын
What is the font name?
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
I am using `monaspace` :)
@tiagodev58385 ай бұрын
I knew I could rely on this already being asked 😂
@pradeepram8458Ай бұрын
i tried the different fonts in the monaspace family - like Neon, Xenon - nothing comes close to how thin it looks on your screen/editor
@jeromelanteri3215 ай бұрын
Nice video, but on the language accordance with logic of interface design, let's said that a Shape has a perimeter. So it does reduce the understand about what is the idea to implement a new interface to any duty contract. I would better think about Position as a new interface. Because a shape will have any area, perimeter by logic. But the position it can have is not due to the fact it is a shape, but because this shape can be somewhere. So, for example, An interface named Object can be the resulted union about Shape and Position. This (in my mind) is the way to think about contract interface in Golang (and most probably, in interface in general). Tell me if you are ok with this observation, please.
@karthikm.18045 ай бұрын
Nice explanation, please bring video on golang projects too
@FloWoelki5 ай бұрын
Thank you! I'll try my best :)
@KaustubhDeokar3 ай бұрын
thank you so much
@FloWoelki3 ай бұрын
Glad I could help you :)
@joselima76555 ай бұрын
Very nice! Thank you +sub
@FloWoelki5 ай бұрын
Thank you! :)
@vishamr20126 ай бұрын
excellent..Thx a lot
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
Thank you for watching :)
@maguilecutty3 ай бұрын
The shape interface is the same explanation everywhere. Why can’t someone make a video with thing we would actually use so the real world usage would make sense
@zero_charge2 ай бұрын
Because of the unoriginality of our era. What get's me though is when I watch a video with a title like this one which says that you are not going to need another tutorial and then proceeds to copy the same examples and same way of presenting the information from other videos.
@FloWoelki2 ай бұрын
Thank you both for the valuable feedback! Do you know how to showcase the concepts in a more real-world use case? I am currently experimenting with different videos with simple projects (like a text analyzer) to apply the learned concept at the end of the video.
@maguilecutty2 ай бұрын
@@FloWoelki Think of something you impliment everyday. Im writing GRPC microservices everyday, creating factories, builder models etc. Maybe just a simple user database writer? Also, something that REALLY GETS MY GOAT (can you tell?) is that every dev on yt just writes a main.go file. Dont be lazy and actually impliment the hex model like you would write an actual service and show how it all works together. This will be INVALUABLE to new devs learnign go!
@saifmohammed14812 ай бұрын
Unless im missing something, its Honestly a bad design by Go designers. How would I know what interfaces a type implements off the bat ?
@FloWoelki2 ай бұрын
You are not missing anything! I personally also think that it is not always 100% clear if a struct uses a specific interface. I like more the explicit design, like in other languages.
@nyvy-z8tАй бұрын
honestly speaking, i am still not convinced as to why are we doing all this, by watching this video. Simple example is understood, but in practical terms what it is solving is still unknown
@meryplays89523 ай бұрын
Does not cover type constraints. For example type Likeint interface {~int}
@inifitecosmos6 ай бұрын
👌
@AbhinavNair-x8t4 ай бұрын
ur explanation is very good but please change the background music. I makes us sleepy
@FloWoelki4 ай бұрын
Well, it's kind of a vibe :D It should be relaxing and enjoyable to watch the video. Usually, I just have some music at the beginning and at the end of the video.
@atljBoss6 ай бұрын
implicit implementation of interfaces is a bit weird in Go. Would prefer the rusty way!
@FloWoelki6 ай бұрын
I prefer the explicit interface implementation as well, because things are much clearer.
@jordanhasgul44016 ай бұрын
If you want to make it clear that a struct implements a particular interface, you can do a compile time assertion. var _ MyInterface = (*MyStruct)(nil) So you get the explicitness while still allowing consumers to define their own interfaces for which your struct can also satisfy. Not saying to do this, just sharing some knowledge.
@atljBoss5 ай бұрын
@@jordanhasgul4401 Damm didn't know this, thanks!
@albizutoday27543 ай бұрын
Is Rust gay?
@zero_charge2 ай бұрын
Yes. I heard it is
@dixztube4 ай бұрын
Took me a good year before it just for some reason made sense lol now it’s like oh ya I get but the explanations are ugh idk I don’t like the contract explanation
@pookiepatsАй бұрын
Cant learn from watching somebody, teachers would do well to generate written lessons or just classify as entertainment but there is no middle ground. So much time is wasted “learning” from videos