Rikudou_Sage@lemmings.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 days agoI'm not sure, but it might be something about UUIDslemmings.worldimagemessage-square26linkfedilinkarrow-up1293arrow-down10
arrow-up1293arrow-down1imageI'm not sure, but it might be something about UUIDslemmings.worldRikudou_Sage@lemmings.world to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 days agomessage-square26linkfedilink
minus-squarefour@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·3 days agoShouldnt it be return UUID { uuid: uuid.uuid } ? I think it would make more sense AND more uuid per UUID
minus-squareRikudou_Sage@lemmings.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·3 days agoThe first UUID is a local type, the second is the name of an embedded struct, the third is the name of the variable. The struct looks something like this (writing this on my phone) type UUID struct { uuid.UUID } So, basically, this is a custom wrapper for a third party UUID implementation.
minus-squareboonhet@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·3 days agoI’m assuming it’s a map/dictionary notation here, rather than a type hint
Shouldnt it be
return UUID { uuid: uuid.uuid }?I think it would make more sense AND more uuid per UUID
The first UUID is a local type, the second is the name of an embedded struct, the third is the name of the variable.
The struct looks something like this (writing this on my phone)
type UUID struct { uuid.UUID }
So, basically, this is a custom wrapper for a third party UUID implementation.
Ahh, that makes sense then
I’m assuming it’s a map/dictionary notation here, rather than a type hint