Go doesn’t have implicit constructors. You would likely write something like this. package main import “fmt” type Console struct { X int Y int } func NewConsole() *Console { return &Console{X: 5} } var console Console = *NewConsole() func main() { fmt.Println(console) } Output: {5 0}
You can get the type of an object with ::class, and compare those: val sameClass = obj1::class == obj2::class More specifically, this section of the above documentation describes that ::class on an object gives you exactly what you want, the exact class of the instance you’re calling it on.
But why? Defining a class inside a package object should be exactly equivalent to defining the classes inside of a separate package with the same name, Precisely. The semantics are (currently) the same, so if you favor defining a class inside a package object, there should be a good reason. But the reality is that …
Ssreg, Unfortunately this is official: You can subclass a generic class, but the subclass must also be a generic class. Let us hope Apple fixes this in a future version. Meanwhile, let us see this as an opportunity to exploit aggregation instead of subclassing. NOTE: As a poor man’s version of a solution, one could …
In fact, it’s exactly the same in terms of performance. React.JS is a relatively new technology, so it’s not clear yet what are considered good practices or don’t. If you want to trust someone, check this AirBNB’s styleguide: https://github.com/airbnb/javascript/tree/master/react#ordering import React, { PropTypes } from ‘react’; const propTypes = { id: PropTypes.number.isRequired, url: PropTypes.string.isRequired, text: …
The solution I found was to create a new function in the subclass that has the same name as the inherited function. In this case push. Then inside the overriding function the inherited function is called via the super keyword. class newArray extends Array{ push(value) { //execute any logic require before pushing value onto array …
To answer your question, have a look on the following : I made a scala class, compiled and decompiled it, and what I got is interesting. class MyScalaClass{ def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = { println(“Hello from main of class”) } } Compiled from “MyScalaClass.scala” public class MyScalaClass { public void main(java.lang.String[]); public MyScalaClass(); } So …
Only parameters in the first parameter section are considered for equality and hashing. scala> case class Foo(a: Int)(b: Int) defined class Foo scala> Foo(0)(0) == Foo(0)(1) res0: Boolean = true scala> Seq(0, 1).map(Foo(0)(_).hashCode) res1: Seq[Int] = List(-1669410282, -1669410282) UPDATE To expose b as a field: scala> case class Foo(a: Int)(val b: Int) defined class Foo …
You could consider using a class attribute to provide a counter. Each instance needs only to ask for the next value. They each get something unique. Eg: from itertools import count class Obj(object): _ids = count(0) def __init__(self): self.id = next(self._ids)
Recently Object got the runtimeType getter. So now, we may not only compare type of object with another type, but actually get the class name of an object. As in: myObject.runtimeType.toString() Furthermore, in the current version of Dart, you can skip the toString operation and directly compare runtimeType of object with target type: myObject.runtimeType == …