What is the reason?
alanyuen
All 3 comments
Here are my points.
Because gorm uses chainable API, calling db.Func() will return a *DB pointer, so if no s.clone(), user will get two pointers, the original *db and the returned *db, which actually point to the same object.
It is dangerous and may cause some concurrent problems.
qw4990
on 23 Sep 2016
Sorry for opening up that topic again, but I started reading through the Gorm code and it seems like you might benefit from just letting the runtime copy, instead of the library doing it manually. If you use a non-pointer receiver you'll obtain a new copy every time, and still benefit from the chaining.
If interested, have a look at my thoughts in more detail here: https://preslav.me/2019/10/06/simple-immutable-builders-in-go-using-value-receivers/
preslavrachev
on 4 Mar 2020
@jinzhu thoughts on last comment?
nmccready
on 6 Aug 2020
Related issues
littletwolee
路
3Comments
superwf
路
3Comments
koalacxr
路
3Comments
kumarsiva07
路
3Comments
hypertornado
路
3Comments
Most helpful comment
Here are my points.
Because gorm uses chainable API, calling db.Func() will return a *DB pointer, so if no s.clone(), user will get two pointers, the original *db and the returned *db, which actually point to the same object.
It is dangerous and may cause some concurrent problems.