Range over int #1644
Closed
Range over int #1644
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This is now superseded by #1645. |
traefiker
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 20, 2024
…o 1.22 behavior This builds on #1644 and adds automatic per-loop variables that are consistent with go 1.22 behavior. See #1643 for discussion. This is still a draft because the for7 version ends up capturing the per-loop var values when they are +1 relative to what they should be. Maybe somehow the incrementing and conditional code is somehow capturing the within loop variables and incrementing them? not sure how that would work. anyway, need to investigate further before this is ready to go, but pushing it here in case there are other issues or someone might figure out this bug before I do..
Bai-Yingjie
pushed a commit
to godevsig/yaegi
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2024
…o 1.22 behavior This builds on traefik#1644 and adds automatic per-loop variables that are consistent with go 1.22 behavior. See traefik#1643 for discussion. This is still a draft because the for7 version ends up capturing the per-loop var values when they are +1 relative to what they should be. Maybe somehow the incrementing and conditional code is somehow capturing the within loop variables and incrementing them? not sure how that would work. anyway, need to investigate further before this is ready to go, but pushing it here in case there are other issues or someone might figure out this bug before I do..
Bai-Yingjie
pushed a commit
to godevsig/yaegi
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2024
…o 1.22 behavior This builds on traefik#1644 and adds automatic per-loop variables that are consistent with go 1.22 behavior. See traefik#1643 for discussion. This is still a draft because the for7 version ends up capturing the per-loop var values when they are +1 relative to what they should be. Maybe somehow the incrementing and conditional code is somehow capturing the within loop variables and incrementing them? not sure how that would work. anyway, need to investigate further before this is ready to go, but pushing it here in case there are other issues or someone might figure out this bug before I do..
Bai-Yingjie
pushed a commit
to godevsig/yaegi
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2024
…o 1.22 behavior This builds on traefik#1644 and adds automatic per-loop variables that are consistent with go 1.22 behavior. See traefik#1643 for discussion. This is still a draft because the for7 version ends up capturing the per-loop var values when they are +1 relative to what they should be. Maybe somehow the incrementing and conditional code is somehow capturing the within loop variables and incrementing them? not sure how that would work. anyway, need to investigate further before this is ready to go, but pushing it here in case there are other issues or someone might figure out this bug before I do..
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds support for the
for i := range nrange-over-int form of the for loop, introduced in go 1.22 golang/go#61405Includes tests for 3 forms, and everything passes.