For range with ints

xurjumon · November 27, 2024, 7:00pm

chatgpt is saying that for range with integer works different, like it is converted to an iterable type first, (to string) and iterates over rune ‘5’ only once, but when I run it in playground, it is working like I would have written:
for i := 0; i < count; i++ {
fmt.Println(“Hello!”)
}

Is this a new feature added in recent go update mine is running in go1.23.1 darwin/arm64.
Is this secure to use?

Dean_Davidson · November 27, 2024, 7:22pm

github.com/golang/go

spec: add range over int, range over func

opened 09:17PM - 17 Jul 23 UTC

closed 05:18PM - 23 Jan 24 UTC

rsc

Proposal Proposal-Accepted

Following discussion on #56413, I propose to add two new types that a [for-range… statement](https://go.dev/ref/spec#For_range) can range over: integers and functions. In the spec, the table that begins the section would have a few more rows added: ``` Range expression 1st value 2nd value array or slice a [n]E, *[n]E, or []E index i int a[i] E string s string type index i int see below rune map m map[K]V key k K m[k] V channel c chan E, <-chan E element e E integer n integer type index i int function, 0 values f func(func()bool) bool function, 1 value f func(func(V)bool) bool value v V function, 2 values f func(func(K, V)bool) bool key k K v V ``` ### Range over integer If n is an integer type, then `for x := range n { ... }` would be completely equivalent to `for x := T(0); x < n; x++ { ... }`, where `T` is the type of `n` (assuming x is not modified in the loop body). The additional spec text for range over integer is: > For an integer <code>n</code>, the index iteration values 0 through <code>n-1</code> are produced, with the same type as <code>n</code>. If <code>n</code> <= 0, the loop does not run any iterations. In the Go code I have examined from the main repo, approximately half of existing 3-clause for loops can be converted to range over integer. Loops that don't care about the index variable become even shorter. For example, the canonical benchmark iteration becomes: for range b.N { do the thing being benchmarked } 3-clause for loops certainly have their place in Go programs, but something as simple as counting to `n` should be easier. The combination of range over integer and range over functions should make range the for loop form of choice for almost all iteration. When you see a 3-clause loop, you'll know it is doing something unusual and know to examine it more carefully. ### Range over function If `f` is a function type of the form `func(yield func(T1, T2)bool) bool`, then `for x, y := range f { ... }` is similar to `f(func(x T1, y T2) bool { ... })`, where the loop body has been moved into the function literal, which is passed to `f` as `yield`. The boolean result from `yield` indicates to `f` whether to keep iterating. The boolean result from `f` itself is ignored in this usage but present to allow easier composition of iterators. I say "similar to" and not "completely equivalent to" because all the control flow statements in the loop body continue to have their original meaning. In particular, break, continue, defer, goto, and return all do exactly what they would do in range over a non-function. Both T1 and T2 are optional: `func(yield func(T1)bool) bool` and `func(yield func()bool) bool` can both be iterated over as well. Just like any other range loops, it is permitted to omit unwanted variables. For example if f has type `func(yield func(T1, T2) bool) bool` any of these are valid: for x, y := range f { ... } for x, _ := range f { ... } for _, y := range f { ... } for x := range f { ... } for range f { ... } The additional spec text for range over function is: > For a function <code>f</code>, the iteration proceeds by calling <code>f</code> with a synthesized <code>yield</code> function that invokes the body of the loop. The values produced correspond to the arguments in successive calls to <code>yield</code>. As with range over other types, it is permitted to declare fewer iteration variables than there are iteration values. The return value from the <code>yield</code> function reports whether <code>f</code> should continue iterating. For example, if the loop body executes a <code>break</code> statement, the corresponding call to <code>yield</code> returns false. The return value from <code>f</code> is ignored by <code>range</code> but conventionally returns false when <code>yield</code> has returned false, to allow composing a sequence of such functions. The use of a synthesized <code>yield</code> function does not change the semantics of the loop body. In particular, <a href="https://go.dev/ref/spec#Break_statements"><code>break</code></a>, <a href="https://go.dev/ref/spec#Continue_statements"><code>continue</code></a>, <a href="https://go.dev/ref/spec#Defer_statements"><code>defer</code></a>, <a href="https://go.dev/ref/spec#Goto_statements"><code>goto</code></a>, and <a href="https://go.dev/ref/spec#Return_statements"><code>return</code></a> statements all behave in a loop body ranging over a function exactly as they do in a loop body ranging over other types. Being able to range over a function enables writing range over user-specified iteration logic, which should simplify many programs. It should also help make use of custom collection types nicer. Not all iteration a program wants to do fits into a single for loop. To convert one of these functions to a "next-based" or "pull-based" iterator, we plan to add a function to the standard library that runs the yield-based ("push-based") iterator in a coroutine, along the lines of the [`coro.Pull` function in my recent blog post](https://research.swtch.com/coro#iterator). The specific name of those functions will be decided in a future proposal; this proposal is limited to language changes, not library changes. One of the problems identified in the discussion of #56413 was having too many different possible functions to range over. For that reason, this proposal drops the possibility of funcs that do not return bool as well as funcs of the form `func() (T, bool)` ("pull-iterators"). Push iterators are the standard form with language support and that packages should provide, and something like `coro.Pull` will allow conversion to pull iterators in code that needs that form. ### Implementation I have implemented this proposal so that we can explore it and understand it better. To run that prototype implementation: go install golang.org/dl/gotip@latest gotip download 510541 # download and build CL 510541 gotip version # should say "(w/ rangefunc)" gotip run foo.go and then use the Go toolchain you just built. If you already have Go checked out and use the codereview plugin, you can: git change 510541 cd src ./make.bash (Or git codereview change if you don't have the standard aliases set up.)

Liebenfiels · November 27, 2024, 8:20pm

Interesting example indeed as I am learning too.

package main

import (
	"fmt"

)

func main() {
	count:=5
	for range count{
	fmt.Println("count", count)
	}
}

Outputs:
count 5
count 5
count 5
count 5
count 5

Below example is like in Python, would be worth to add your one to official GO “A Tour by GO” and to GO by example website with explanation.

https://gobyexample.com/for

for i := range 3 {
        fmt.Println("range", i)
    }

it will print:
range 0
range 1
range 2

Python code equivalent

for i in range (3):
     print("range", i)

range 0
range 1
range 2

jagtap-sagar · January 14, 2025, 2:13pm

In Go, range is design for iterate over collection , here 3 & 5 is single integer . it is not collection .
So, you will get compiler error.

lemarkar · January 14, 2025, 2:19pm

No you won’t. Go 1.22 introduced range over integers.

Liebenfiels · January 14, 2025, 6:12pm

This example I have from website I use to learn too
https://gobyexample.com/for

also I use golangbot.com but there is no range example there

system · April 14, 2025, 6:13pm

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.