We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
You can avoid this go vet warning:
... gamut.Colors{ {"Kadminumrot", gamut.Hex(fmt.Sprintf("#%02x%02x%02x", 230, 50, 0)), "Rot-1"}, {Name: "Signalrot", Color: gamut.Hex(fmt.Sprintf("#%02x%02x%02x", 225, 0, 0)), Reference: "Rot-2"}, ...
The first definition ("Kadminumrot", ...) produces the warning, the second definition (Name: "Signalrot", ...) does not.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54548441/composite-literal-uses-unkeyed-fields: Ignoring this vet warning has the potential to lead to really nasty and hard to track down runtime bugs, so you'd be better off if you were to always specify the keys of 3rd party structs explicitly.
It's a cosmetic change because you are the owner and not a user of the lib. The warning can easily be removed in your lib with search and replace.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
You can avoid this go vet warning:
The first definition ("Kadminumrot", ...) produces the warning, the second definition (Name: "Signalrot", ...) does not.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54548441/composite-literal-uses-unkeyed-fields: Ignoring this vet warning has the potential to lead to really nasty and hard to track down runtime bugs, so you'd be better off if you were to always specify the keys of 3rd party structs explicitly.
It's a cosmetic change because you are the owner and not a user of the lib. The warning can easily be removed in your lib with search and replace.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: