Send everyone here 🎉

Sometimes 😂

Same Question, If you found an answer plz let me know.

​@@yaminokaze4475 i also want to know this, but i think, he just made a mistake, because there is no reason to make it non pointer.

@@yaminokaze4475 I found out, that if we use pointer, we should somewhere allocate a memory for the pointer like &Position{}. So, we will have to write a contructor for a SpecialPosition struct, if we embbed Poisition in it like a pointer, it will be like this: func NewSpecialPosition() *SpecialPosition { return &SpecialPosition{ Position: &Position{}, } }

@@alexobzorThanks, this really helped!

Shouldn't be the case that the pointer version stores a pointer to the Position struct and the other ones stores a full copy by value of the struct? It's not the same.

I had this exact question too

Same here

Thanks!

Noted that on the list

Gruvbox

@@anthonygg_ ahh yes, exactly! Thank you. :)

Yes

Ok buddy.

the containing type's method is given preference, else you can do "Outer.Inner.field" to select the embedded field or method

My man! How are you?

I am doing amazing! Great to see the channel grow like this❤️

Not sure, no particular reason I guess 🥲

@@anthonygg_ 😅

No special reason. You can drop the pointer

@@anthonygg_ Cool! Is the struct by default a pointer in that case? Wondering why in Player has a pointer to Position - can we drop it here too? I mean, i get the difference between pointer/not pointer, but wondering that is the proper way to do it in GoLang

God dammit :). For some reason when copy-pasting from another video that link gets truncated somehow. Anyway, normally should be fixed now. Thanks for letting me know, and thanks upfront for the coffee

@@anthonygg_ Think I had the same problem in some other videos of you. Anyway, above link works now :)

Quite a lot of nuance between them! The default value of a reference type is NIL, so if you forget to use the factory method and just build a Player raw with p := Player{} (or forget to init your embedded types in the constructor), it'll have a nil Position. And as you might guess, in this case if you try invoking Player.Move you'll get a runtime error. - so why would I ever want to use a by-reference embed? To keep working with the videogame example, you'll eventually add a Sprite struct to the project. Your Sprite will have some graphics, a physical size, a count of the available frames of animation, maybe it has a draw method or a non-member function handles that, whatever. A lot of enemies will share the same sprite asset, so embedding the Sprite struct by-reference makes sense here. A lot of unique enemy structs can point to the same single instance of Sprite. We can just have it as a reference passed in to the constructor. We'll let each enemy track which frame of animation they are on independently, not within the Sprite struct. Another idea is this opens the door to data-oriented design. let's say you declare all your positions in a big slice. enemies:=make([]Position, 1000) now in your enemy constructor, you point each enemy's Position to its own &enemies[i]. now when you write a function that iterates over "the position of the enemies" it has the advantage of cpu cache coherency. You'll also need to track which positions in the slice are actually 'real', too, fortunately this is a trivial to do, define a new type with by-value Position embedding and an extra bool. by-value has the advantage of keeping things simple. no nil pointer to trip over, no extra malloc or reference for the gc. Should probably be your default go-to, then when you see an embedded pointer you'll think "okay, maybe this is a many-to-few relationship, or there's a special purpose for this."

Thank you, makes a lot of sense!

No real reason better not use them in that case

Correct but it was such a good keyword for the title

You have a point

Its has its purpose sometimes. But most of the time its not the best fit. So I agree here with you. Inheritance is a click bait.

@@anthonygg_ I meant GO's struct embedding. It blows

Cause Im a weirdo.

It is Vim

Its more of a tick I do when thinking. Im working on it.

@@anthonygg_ have you considered adding some low level background music to obscure the keyboard?

@@Combatwhombat Im considering adding more keyboard noise in the future. What do you think?

@@anthonygg_ I think, I have already stopped watching and googled the topic on a few of your videos as a result. To my knowledge, I don't have misophonia and generally tolerate things that those with it don't. I mean this as constructive feedback. A simple and low background beat track that doesn't overpower or conflict with your voice but creates something more like a white-noise mask is a simple thing to do that doesn't require you "work on it"; it let's you use the keyboard you like, avoids needing excessive filters and work on the audio track, and helps feature your content without drawing attention away.

*Slow is smooth and smooth is fast :)