The Most Efficient Struct Configuration Pattern For Golang

  Рет қаралды 60,988

Anthony GG

Anthony GG

Жыл бұрын

► Join my Discord community for free education 👉 / discord
► Pre order (get 30% off) my exclusive Golang course 👉 fulltimegodev.com
► Follow me on Twitter 👉 / anthdm
► Follow me on GitHub 👉 github.com/anthdm
In this Golang tutorial, you'll learn about an efficient configuration pattern in Golang that will help you master complex structures and simplify your code. Discover how to unlock the power of configurable structures in Golang and create mind-blowing patterns to enhance your programming skills.

Пікірлер: 161
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
► Join my Discord community for free education 👉 discord.com/invite/bDy8t4b3Rz ► Pre order (get 30% off) my Golang course 👉 fulltimegodev.com Thanks for watching
@kafran
@kafran 10 ай бұрын
This pattern is commonly known as the "Functional Options" pattern. The Functional Options pattern is a design pattern in Go where you pass in functions that alter the state of a type. These functions are often called "option functions". They provide a way to cleanly design APIs and offer a more flexible and readable way to interact with a function or type. Nice demonstration on how to implement them. Thanks.
@abiiranathan
@abiiranathan Жыл бұрын
Functional Options Pattern... popularized by Dave Cheney
@wuilliam321
@wuilliam321 Жыл бұрын
Any book/reference? Thanks
@jamesprendergast7158
@jamesprendergast7158 Жыл бұрын
Surprised gg didn't know the name TBH
@Cruzylife
@Cruzylife Жыл бұрын
@@jamesprendergast7158 because Ant creates his own meta
@TehKarmalizer
@TehKarmalizer 5 ай бұрын
Looks like functional riff on the builder pattern.
@necroowl3953
@necroowl3953 7 ай бұрын
1. Make the config elements private 2. Make the options type a public interface, with a single private method (apply(config) config) 3. Expose public functions returning this interface 4. Add a function type that complies with the option interface, make that type implement the apply method by calling itself. 5. Add a no-op type for validation when needed. 6. Validate input before returning a config type. Boom, functional options with a restrictive builder pattern, for your constructors. You can make it generic too.
@macot79
@macot79 3 ай бұрын
Hey! Those suggestions are really great, I'm new at Golang and have tried to adapt Anthonygg's example with your suggestions, but I'm a bit stuck at step 5. Could you clarify what you mean? Thanks
@hugorojasmonzon1487
@hugorojasmonzon1487 Ай бұрын
Could you create a github example of these ideas ?
@jeezusjr
@jeezusjr Жыл бұрын
Perfect timing! I am doing something right now that can use this pattern. Thanks!
@jex8885
@jex8885 11 ай бұрын
This channel is amazing, you're making my Go code better and better for every video!
@kylestubblefield3404
@kylestubblefield3404 9 ай бұрын
This is a great video. I stumbled onto using this pattern by accident, it was very useful for a previous project I was working on
@rajdama205
@rajdama205 7 ай бұрын
The way you make any concept understand is just amazing !!
@skyline7349
@skyline7349 5 ай бұрын
Thank you for posting this Anthony, very nice pattern and will be trying to incorporate it with my starter projects
@bjugdbjk
@bjugdbjk 11 ай бұрын
Just love this man !! More like this brother, these r the stuff which really play with the Dopamine !!
@bigtymer4862
@bigtymer4862 Жыл бұрын
Love these pattern videos man!!
@Crazyfulization
@Crazyfulization 8 ай бұрын
Really helpful, you can see the benefit right away! Awesome stuff
@kajfehlhaber
@kajfehlhaber Жыл бұрын
Awesome video as always! ❤
@vitaliik8315
@vitaliik8315 4 ай бұрын
Thanks for yours lessons. One of the best video lessons for go.
@kanfit
@kanfit 11 ай бұрын
Thanks, I think you also talked about a bit of functional programming in Golang in this video, which is very nice.
@codewithluke
@codewithluke Жыл бұрын
Nice one. Really enjoy this pattern.
@hugorojasmonzon1487
@hugorojasmonzon1487 Ай бұрын
Amazing video, thanks for sharing your knowledge!
@fauzi5848
@fauzi5848 10 ай бұрын
This is so useful, thank you so much!
@vitiok78
@vitiok78 Жыл бұрын
Reinventing the wheel of named function parameters with default values))
@susiebaka3388
@susiebaka3388 3 ай бұрын
you're free to use a map or whatever my guy
@arieheinrich3457
@arieheinrich3457 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for diving into design patterns Anthony ! This is what separate starting devs to more advanced ones, that we all aspire to be, and that is understanding design patterns. Looks more like the Builder pattern than the Visitor one.
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
Apperantly is the “functional options” pattern 🤷‍♀️
@arieheinrich3457
@arieheinrich3457 Жыл бұрын
@@anthonygg_ yes Functional Options Builder pattern !
@dejanranisavljevic
@dejanranisavljevic 8 ай бұрын
I also know this as a builder pattern, it's very common and good use for building test fixtures
@user-bh8xz4xy7o
@user-bh8xz4xy7o 6 ай бұрын
Watch this video for some time ago, remember. And return now to implement this in my project)) Antony is gigachad, thx for the video
@grim.reaper
@grim.reaper Жыл бұрын
This is amazing and used in a lot of places tbh. This is very true that it's used in gRPC, also ssh package if I am not wrong because ssh connection has a lot of options. While putting this in a library the "withXYZ" functions can also be a method where it can have the server receiver methods. This is so so so amazing!!!
@lokthar6314
@lokthar6314 Жыл бұрын
Quality Content
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
🙏
@whatwhat2573
@whatwhat2573 6 ай бұрын
Nice clean pattern to understand too
@lotfikamel5947
@lotfikamel5947 Жыл бұрын
As always very advanced content
@JT-mr3db
@JT-mr3db Ай бұрын
Does feel like a take on the builder pattern. Incredibly handy pattern a lot of Elm libs use as well.
@seanknowles9985
@seanknowles9985 6 ай бұрын
Hey big boss, two questions: 1. How to make an efficient cron job scheduler from scratch? 2. How to make realtime subscriptions to database values - for example we have key value store but then we build realtime subs that can subscribe to changes of a key and its data? Another quality video for the fans homie, love this channel. Bests, Super fan.
@michael_loc009
@michael_loc009 Жыл бұрын
I wish you would upload this amazing tutorial when I first learnt Go.
@Rohinthas
@Rohinthas Ай бұрын
Aah functional stuff is just so pleasing to think about
@pserra94
@pserra94 Жыл бұрын
Hi Antonio, how are you? I'm migrating from nodejs to Golang thanks to you and your videos, always amazing! I don't know if it's asking too much, but could you make a video/tutorial for developing web crawlers with golang, please? I was googling about it but I didn't find any good content about it. Thank you so much my friend, you are amazing!
@sibonelongobese8639
@sibonelongobese8639 Жыл бұрын
Top notch stuff 👌🏽
@victorkochkarev2576
@victorkochkarev2576 Ай бұрын
This is a beautiful pattern!
@grise123
@grise123 Жыл бұрын
nice pattern, seems very helful
@mihaiii6720
@mihaiii6720 8 ай бұрын
This pattern is so good !!! I guess you can use it in TS/JS too
@miguelborges7913
@miguelborges7913 Жыл бұрын
This is great!
@henrisetiawan7547
@henrisetiawan7547 26 күн бұрын
Gem....amazing explanation..and going sub ..
@matthewbridges3147
@matthewbridges3147 Ай бұрын
Thanks for the explainer, I'd have been searching docs for a standard way to do this without realising it requires a pattern. In JS I'd just use a default arg param and a spread operator to override
@inaccessiblecardinal9352
@inaccessiblecardinal9352 Жыл бұрын
Good stuff. Aws' sdk has this pattern in every client (that I've used).
@orterves
@orterves Ай бұрын
That's a beautiful pattern
@johnb7657
@johnb7657 3 ай бұрын
Thank you, perfect
@fluctura
@fluctura 7 ай бұрын
Meanwhile in TypeScript: mergedOpts = { ...defaultOpts, ...opts } as Opts But its a cool pattern. Go doesn't have "map spread operator" and thats a good thing probably. But sometimes it would be so handy to have more syntactic sugar
@fluctura
@fluctura 7 ай бұрын
btw it is a mix of Higher order Functions you write and you use them to compose a struct using Inversion of Control. So basically Higher order compositional Inversion of Control based state management (as your config acts as a state) 😂😅
@kevinkkirimii
@kevinkkirimii Жыл бұрын
I have misused this pattern. Quite useful
@vanshajdhar9223
@vanshajdhar9223 Жыл бұрын
Beautiful ❤️
@yogeshdharya3857
@yogeshdharya3857 10 ай бұрын
3:50 to 3:53 Witch Craft and Woo Doo ! . My man's a part-time wizard
@fringefringe7282
@fringefringe7282 Жыл бұрын
This is pretty cool.
@ivanrachev9409
@ivanrachev9409 Жыл бұрын
Cool approach! Just wondering, why did you go back to VS Code?
@ShadwTrooper
@ShadwTrooper Ай бұрын
Clever. I like it.
@burionyt
@burionyt Жыл бұрын
only real world shit in the channel 💪🏼 love your content as always ❤
@Epistemer
@Epistemer Жыл бұрын
This is honestly really cool, I always hated how there is no way to do kwargs in go
@FareAlert
@FareAlert 8 ай бұрын
Opts (Opts, opts), opts Opts Opts opts😅 Thank you Op for the video ; I appreciate your talent and time
@HiperCode10100
@HiperCode10100 5 ай бұрын
very good thx bro
@myrachoantonio8832
@myrachoantonio8832 Жыл бұрын
that was really cool trick i like it
@maninalift
@maninalift 7 ай бұрын
Is there an advantage over the builder pattern? It seems to be equivalent in usage but I'd guess harder to optimise.
@jf3518
@jf3518 4 ай бұрын
Great work around. Though I would not use it, as I cannot use an existing config to initialize the state. Instead I would just use merge function to join default config with provided config.
@plashless3406
@plashless3406 Жыл бұрын
amazing.
@startengine8838
@startengine8838 6 ай бұрын
how inner function (the one that you retuen in options functions) gets the pointer which it has as input when higher lexical scope doesnt provide it
@MrXperx
@MrXperx 8 ай бұрын
Looks to be a variation of the builder pattern. (I come from OOPS)
@Md.MitunRahman
@Md.MitunRahman 7 ай бұрын
this is unbelievable
@banatibor83
@banatibor83 2 ай бұрын
It looks fancy but a bit of a hassle. A simple builder pattern is much more readable I think. The default values are nice. Then just put methods onto the ServerOpts type which return *ServerOpts. type ServerOpts struct {...}, func NewServerOpts() *ServerOpts {...set defaults...} , func (s *ServerOpts) Id(id string) *ServerOpts {... set id ..}, func (s *ServerOpts) MaxConn(maxconn int) *ServerOpts {...set maxcon..} Then you can use it like this: s := NewServer(NewServerOpts().Id("my-server").MaxConn(100))
@ThundersLeague
@ThundersLeague 11 күн бұрын
Exactly. This is much better for discoverability, instead of having a bunch of standalone functions.
@reikooters
@reikooters 8 ай бұрын
Isn't this kind of a limitation on the language? If you could specify default values when you declare structs, then this would go from 50 lines down to 10? You mentioned doing this function approach if you were building a library. How would you do this in a way that's easy for consumers of the library to use and know which functions are available to be used for configuration? Would you put them together into a "configuration" package? (I'm not a Go user, just interested)
@sunofabeach9424
@sunofabeach9424 7 ай бұрын
this language is limited is so many ways that eventually you give up on it and probably on life as well. GO, while being a higher level than C, looks and feels as clunky as C. but what in C is honestly called a hack, in GO called a pattern. C was designed to be as easy to parse and compile as possible and that's why it lacks so much. GO has no such excuse
@klamberext
@klamberext 5 ай бұрын
The example here is for overriding defaults. Imagine instead a environment specific factory configuration or just a variety of options: Lets say your server/thingy supports different storage services - S3, ftp, local. Now you want to say: withStorageDriverFromEnv, or withFtpStorage or withS3 storage. All of them require different kinds of paths, credentials etc.. Now do that with default values on struct. The limit is in the example given.
@klamberext
@klamberext 5 ай бұрын
For consumers you provide docs. Or you instead implement the OptFunc as an interface . Then it would be possible to view the list of implementations for given interface(if you have good IDE) .
@sfsdeniso5941
@sfsdeniso5941 Жыл бұрын
It is called 'Functional options pattern'
@timurgirfanov531
@timurgirfanov531 Жыл бұрын
It's like Visitor pattern, but in a functional way
@ChristopheHa
@ChristopheHa 6 ай бұрын
I guess this could also be combined with builder pattern, and then you can just can chain those withX on the builder and build will return the instance
@PouriyaJamshidi
@PouriyaJamshidi Жыл бұрын
This was really informative. A side question. Any particular reason for using int instead of uint in maxConn? I noticed most people use int where a uint makes more sense. In this case, we cannot have negative maxConn.
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
Just for demonstration purposes. Uint is better.
@PouriyaJamshidi
@PouriyaJamshidi Жыл бұрын
@@anthonygg_ Thanks. I think somewhere I heard something along the lines of integer underflow and was wondering if this has something to do with that
@helmchen1239
@helmchen1239 8 ай бұрын
-1 meaning unlimited could be an option in that case though :)
@MENTOKz
@MENTOKz Жыл бұрын
oh snap cool man
@suikast420
@suikast420 3 ай бұрын
Cool fancy< stuff. What about toi make a fluent api with that style?
@CaffeineForCode
@CaffeineForCode Жыл бұрын
The only problem with this pattern is that you lose info from the LSP. Working with the AWS SDK, I often have no idea what is possible or what the opt functions do without reading the documentation. It’s a trade off, especially when you have a lot of config options
@tigranrostomyan9231
@tigranrostomyan9231 9 ай бұрын
I think it is possible to solve by putting all 'OptFunc's into another (child) package, e.g. "server/opts". Maybe it's a bit of overkill but if you then type 'opts.' and call autocompletion it will list all 'OptFunc's
@jub0bs
@jub0bs 8 ай бұрын
You write: "I often have no idea what is possible or what the opt functions do without reading the documentation." But is a classic config struct any better, in this respect?
@jurijskobecs2803
@jurijskobecs2803 4 ай бұрын
@@jub0bs of course its better, you got one place/struct to check all the possible options
@jub0bs
@jub0bs 4 ай бұрын
@@jurijskobecs2803 The fields of a struct type tell you close to nothing about how they're going to be used by the rest of the program. Their names give you clues at best, and their documentation is meant to give you accurate information. But you'll need to dig into the implementation to definitely find out. In this respect, a struct isn't superior or inferior to functional options.
@MesheeKnight
@MesheeKnight Жыл бұрын
We use to call this the Option pattern. Would you have a nice one for Mandatory config where you cannot provide a reasonable default, like a sql.Conn?
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
Thats an amazing question! You could force an interface as option and implement a noop for that interface as default to prevent nil pointers. What do you think?
@MesheeKnight
@MesheeKnight Жыл бұрын
@@anthonygg_ i see the Idea, but i am looking for a way for large amount of mandatories, noop wont do the trick i think
@sfsdeniso5941
@sfsdeniso5941 Жыл бұрын
It is called 'Functional options pattern' should look like this: func NewServer(addr string, opts ...Option) error () {.....} so here addr is mandatory. Usage example: server, err := NewServer("localhost", withPort(8080), withTimeout(time.Second))
@vasiliyaristov7148
@vasiliyaristov7148 3 ай бұрын
Interesting
@metaltyphoon
@metaltyphoon Жыл бұрын
AWS SDK uses this pattern too.
@user-sj3fp2xq2m
@user-sj3fp2xq2m 4 ай бұрын
This is essentially a builder pattern written in Go.
@yawneed
@yawneed 2 ай бұрын
Hello. Where does download your vscode config?
@luizfernandopereira5120
@luizfernandopereira5120 8 ай бұрын
This pattern is just an adptation from the Fluent Interface Pattern existing in OOP languages, is nice to see it in go though.
@heartly4u
@heartly4u Жыл бұрын
why not create a builder pattern, which will do the same as what you are doing, with more readability.
@JohnDoe-ji1zv
@JohnDoe-ji1zv Жыл бұрын
Can you share example how your pattern is more clear than the one shown in a video ?
@heartly4u
@heartly4u Жыл бұрын
@@JohnDoe-ji1zv wouldnt it be more readable this way newServer().withTls().withId().withMaxConnections().build()
@tgraupne
@tgraupne Жыл бұрын
I was thinking about the same thing. 🤔 Maybe the authors or some other people would like to chime in.
@mozhago8280
@mozhago8280 Жыл бұрын
Is this pattern used in go starndard lib?
@folium5725
@folium5725 Жыл бұрын
Hi Anthony, what theme do you use?
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
Gruvbox
@x0z59
@x0z59 8 ай бұрын
will this thing not make established Go features convoluted? aren't you not reinventing the wheel here?
@TheSurvivor1963
@TheSurvivor1963 2 ай бұрын
This is a good pattern, I've been using it for years, but why not make an option function that returns the same option function with the previous value? That way you can change and reset options on the fly. An example could be to elevate debug logging temporarily for some very complex code segment. Rob Pike wrote an article about this for some years ago. type Option func(*Some) Option type Some struct{ ... dLevel int } func Debug(d int) Option { return func(s *Some) Option { t := s.dLevel s.dLevel = d return SetOption(t) } }
@igor-glagola
@igor-glagola 7 ай бұрын
Looks like some sort of builder pattern
@matiasbpg
@matiasbpg Жыл бұрын
What is the advantage of this pattern over a builder pattern?
@sfsdeniso5941
@sfsdeniso5941 Жыл бұрын
Error handling In go you cannot chain builder calls as each must return error (and not this)
@matiasbpg
@matiasbpg Жыл бұрын
@@sfsdeniso5941 thanks for the answer! However I think a builder for the opts struct shouldnt have this problem, but now I can see the inconvenience. Maybe a walk around could be that the builder struct could itself carry through the error as a property and the build method could return the value error tuple
@quantenlicht
@quantenlicht Жыл бұрын
Start: 1:03
@pyronb
@pyronb 7 ай бұрын
Can somone please rephrase what's happening at 6:15 with fn(&o) ? It's not clear to me how everything works together
@Aedaeum
@Aedaeum 5 ай бұрын
He's using the spread operator to allow as many OptFunc's as you want. He then uses the range operator to loop through each OptFunc and executes them with a reference to the options struct (that's the **fn(&o)**), so that the OptFunc can modify the options directly, overwriting the default options.
@robinlioret7998
@robinlioret7998 9 ай бұрын
I think it's a Go version of the Builder pattern, but not sure.
@henryconner780
@henryconner780 6 күн бұрын
You do be the that guy
@JasonJA88
@JasonJA88 Жыл бұрын
👍
@valcubeto
@valcubeto Ай бұрын
This looks very oop
@dmitriyobidin6049
@dmitriyobidin6049 3 ай бұрын
The only problem i have with this pattern is that it is not obvious which methods/func you can use as options.
@user-br3hw1us7k
@user-br3hw1us7k Жыл бұрын
docker compose v2 uses this pattern
@caiocesarmelolopes2156
@caiocesarmelolopes2156 10 ай бұрын
That looks like function as parameter that was introduced in java 8 with lambdas xD
@chaitany.a
@chaitany.a 9 ай бұрын
This is like a functional builder pattern...?
@yjawhar
@yjawhar Жыл бұрын
Go can easily resolve this issue by providing the option of built in default parameters similar to Python during the definition of the function
@codewithtee
@codewithtee 7 ай бұрын
I did something with this .... But my approach was quite different,
@TimurSevimli
@TimurSevimli 4 ай бұрын
Why not just take configuration data from a JSON file, like config.json?
@polnio
@polnio 13 күн бұрын
This pattern looks a lot like the builder pattern. Am I wrong?
@DemmyDemon
@DemmyDemon Жыл бұрын
Suggestion: Buy a pop filter.
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ Жыл бұрын
Donate me one 🤷‍♀️
@jaymartinez311
@jaymartinez311 5 ай бұрын
the ‘…’ is called variadic.
@SigmaChirality
@SigmaChirality 2 ай бұрын
Why not just make your config a .yaml file and parse it into a Config struct? Then you give your library users a defaults.yaml and they can copy and modify it at their will?
@ajiwahidin423
@ajiwahidin423 4 ай бұрын
I think more easier like this one below ```go type Config struct { Env "string" } func getConfig() (config Config){ env, ok := os.LookupEnv("ENV") If !ok{ env = "your default value of ENV here" } config.Env = env return } type Data struct { pool *pgxpool.Pool } func NewData(pool *pgxpool.Pool) (*Data, error) { if pool == nil { return nil, errors.New("no pool ready") } return &Data{ pool: pool }, nil } func main(){ config := getConfig() data, err := NewData(config.Env) } ```
@bhumit070
@bhumit070 4 ай бұрын
I think I have seen this pattern in google youtube package
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ 4 ай бұрын
Yup!
@Edd211
@Edd211 6 ай бұрын
How to code??
@anthonygg_
@anthonygg_ 6 ай бұрын
Press buttons
Go Pointers: When & How To Use Them Efficiently
14:09
Anthony GG
Рет қаралды 65 М.
How To Use The Context Package In Golang?
17:03
Anthony GG
Рет қаралды 51 М.
Super gymnastics 😍🫣
00:15
Lexa_Merin
Рет қаралды 33 МЛН
When Steve And His Dog Don'T Give Away To Each Other 😂️
00:21
BigSchool
Рет қаралды 12 МЛН
1 класс vs 11 класс  (игрушка)
00:30
БЕРТ
Рет қаралды 1,9 МЛН
How To Make Any Game Mechanic - Episode 11 - Anti-Gravity
14:33
ThatOneUnityDev
Рет қаралды 4
Beginners Should Think Differently When Writing Golang
11:35
Anthony GG
Рет қаралды 92 М.
10 Design Patterns Explained in 10 Minutes
11:04
Fireship
Рет қаралды 2,2 МЛН
Golang is OG?
5:16
Martin Baun
Рет қаралды 3,3 М.
This Is The BEST Way To Structure Your GO Projects
11:08
Melkey
Рет қаралды 60 М.
My Initial Impresson Of Go
12:39
TheVimeagen
Рет қаралды 67 М.
3 Golang Tips For Beginners I Wish I Knew Sooner
13:18
Anthony GG
Рет қаралды 32 М.
Use Arc Instead of Vec
15:21
Logan Smith
Рет қаралды 134 М.
Super gymnastics 😍🫣
00:15
Lexa_Merin
Рет қаралды 33 МЛН