2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
<!--{
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
"Title": "The Laws of Reflection",
|
|
|
|
"Template": true
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
}-->
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Reflection in computing is the
|
|
|
|
ability of a program to examine its own structure, particularly
|
|
|
|
through types; it's a form of metaprogramming. It's also a great
|
|
|
|
source of confusion.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
In this article we attempt to clarify things by explaining how
|
|
|
|
reflection works in Go. Each language's reflection model is
|
|
|
|
different (and many languages don't support it at all), but
|
|
|
|
this article is about Go, so for the rest of this article the word
|
|
|
|
"reflection" should be taken to mean "reflection in Go".
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Types and interfaces</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Because reflection builds on the type system, let's start with a
|
|
|
|
refresher about types in Go.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Go is statically typed. Every variable has a static type, that is,
|
|
|
|
exactly one type known and fixed at compile time: <code>int</code>,
|
|
|
|
<code>float32</code>, <code>*MyType</code>, <code>[]byte</code>,
|
|
|
|
and so on. If we declare
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface.go" `/type MyInt/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
then <code>i</code> has type <code>int</code> and <code>j</code>
|
|
|
|
has type <code>MyInt</code>. The variables <code>i</code> and
|
|
|
|
<code>j</code> have distinct static types and, although they have
|
|
|
|
the same underlying type, they cannot be assigned to one another
|
|
|
|
without a conversion.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
One important category of type is interface types, which represent
|
|
|
|
fixed sets of methods. An interface variable can store any concrete
|
|
|
|
(non-interface) value as long as that value implements the
|
|
|
|
interface's methods. A well-known pair of examples is
|
|
|
|
<code>io.Reader</code> and <code>io.Writer</code>, the types
|
2012-03-27 03:53:16 -06:00
|
|
|
<code>Reader</code> and <code>Writer</code> from the
|
|
|
|
<a href="/pkg/io/">io package</a>:
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface.go" `/// Reader/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Any type that implements a <code>Read</code> (or
|
|
|
|
<code>Write</code>) method with this signature is said to implement
|
|
|
|
<code>io.Reader</code> (or <code>io.Writer</code>). For the
|
|
|
|
purposes of this discussion, that means that a variable of type
|
|
|
|
<code>io.Reader</code> can hold any value whose type has a
|
|
|
|
<code>Read</code> method:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface.go" `/func readers/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
It's important to be clear that whatever concrete value
|
|
|
|
<code>r</code> may hold, <code>r</code>'s type is always
|
|
|
|
<code>io.Reader</code>: Go is statically typed and the static type
|
|
|
|
of <code>r</code> is <code>io.Reader</code>.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
An extremely important example of an interface type is the empty
|
|
|
|
interface:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
interface{}
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
It represents the empty set of methods and is satisfied by any
|
|
|
|
value at all, since any value has zero or more methods.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Some people say that Go's interfaces are dynamically typed, but
|
|
|
|
that is misleading. They are statically typed: a variable of
|
|
|
|
interface type always has the same static type, and even though at
|
|
|
|
run time the value stored in the interface variable may change
|
|
|
|
type, that value will always satisfy the interface.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
We need to be precise about all this because reflection and
|
|
|
|
interfaces are closely related.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>The representation of an interface</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
2012-03-27 03:53:16 -06:00
|
|
|
Russ Cox has written a
|
|
|
|
<a href="http://research.swtch.com/2009/12/go-data-structures-interfaces.html">detailed blog post</a>
|
|
|
|
about the representation of interface values in Go. It's not necessary to
|
|
|
|
repeat the full story here, but a simplified summary is in order.
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
A variable of interface type stores a pair: the concrete value
|
|
|
|
assigned to the variable, and that value's type descriptor.
|
|
|
|
To be more precise, the value is the underlying concrete data item
|
|
|
|
that implements the interface and the type describes the full type
|
|
|
|
of that item. For instance, after
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface.go" `/func typeAssertions/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
<code>r</code> contains, schematically, the (value, type) pair,
|
|
|
|
(<code>tty</code>, <code>*os.File</code>). Notice that the type
|
|
|
|
<code>*os.File</code> implements methods other than
|
|
|
|
<code>Read</code>; even though the interface value provides access
|
|
|
|
only to the <code>Read</code> method, the value inside carries all
|
|
|
|
the type information about that value. That's why we can do things
|
|
|
|
like this:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface.go" `/var w io.Writer/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The expression in this assignment is a type assertion; what it
|
|
|
|
asserts is that the item inside <code>r</code> also implements
|
|
|
|
<code>io.Writer</code>, and so we can assign it to <code>w</code>.
|
|
|
|
After the assignment, <code>w</code> will contain the pair
|
|
|
|
(<code>tty</code>, <code>*os.File</code>). That's the same pair as
|
|
|
|
was held in <code>r</code>. The static type of the interface
|
|
|
|
determines what methods may be invoked with an interface variable,
|
|
|
|
even though the concrete value inside may have a larger set of
|
|
|
|
methods.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Continuing, we can do this:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface.go" `/var empty interface{}/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
and our empty interface value <code>e</code> will again contain
|
|
|
|
that same pair, (<code>tty</code>, <code>*os.File</code>). That's
|
|
|
|
handy: an empty interface can hold any value and contains all the
|
|
|
|
information we could ever need about that value.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
(We don't need a type assertion here because it's known statically
|
|
|
|
that <code>w</code> satisfies the empty interface. In the example
|
|
|
|
where we moved a value from a <code>Reader</code> to a
|
|
|
|
<code>Writer</code>, we needed to be explicit and use a type
|
|
|
|
assertion because <code>Writer</code>'s methods are not a
|
|
|
|
subset of <code>Reader</code>'s.)
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
One important detail is that the pair inside an interface always
|
|
|
|
has the form (value, concrete type) and cannot have the form
|
|
|
|
(value, interface type). Interfaces do not hold interface
|
|
|
|
values.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Now we're ready to reflect.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>The first law of reflection</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>1. Reflection goes from interface value to reflection object.</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
At the basic level, reflection is just a mechanism to examine the
|
|
|
|
type and value pair stored inside an interface variable. To get
|
|
|
|
started, there are two types we need to know about in
|
2012-03-27 03:53:16 -06:00
|
|
|
<a href="/pkg/reflect/">package reflect</a>:
|
|
|
|
<a href="/pkg/reflect/#Type">Type</a> and
|
|
|
|
<a href="/pkg/reflect/#Value">Value</a>. Those two types
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
give access to the contents of an interface variable, and two
|
|
|
|
simple functions, called <code>reflect.TypeOf</code> and
|
|
|
|
<code>reflect.ValueOf</code>, retrieve <code>reflect.Type</code>
|
|
|
|
and <code>reflect.Value</code> pieces out of an interface value.
|
|
|
|
(Also, from the <code>reflect.Value</code> it's easy to get
|
|
|
|
to the <code>reflect.Type</code>, but let's keep the
|
|
|
|
<code>Value</code> and <code>Type</code> concepts separate for
|
|
|
|
now.)
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Let's start with <code>TypeOf</code>:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/package main/` `/STOP main/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
This program prints
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
type: float64
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
2012-03-27 03:53:16 -06:00
|
|
|
You might be wondering where the interface is here, since the program looks
|
|
|
|
like it's passing the <code>float64</code> variable <code>x</code>, not an
|
|
|
|
interface value, to <code>reflect.TypeOf</code>. But it's there; as
|
|
|
|
<a href="/pkg/reflect/#Type.TypeOf">godoc reports</a>, the signature of
|
|
|
|
<code>reflect.TypeOf</code> includes an empty interface:
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
// TypeOf returns the reflection Type of the value in the interface{}.
|
|
|
|
func TypeOf(i interface{}) Type
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
When we call <code>reflect.TypeOf(x)</code>, <code>x</code> is
|
|
|
|
first stored in an empty interface, which is then passed as the
|
|
|
|
argument; <code>reflect.TypeOf</code> unpacks that empty interface
|
|
|
|
to recover the type information.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The <code>reflect.ValueOf</code> function, of course, recovers the
|
|
|
|
value (from here on we'll elide the boilerplate and focus just on
|
|
|
|
the executable code):
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-21 17:42:04 -06:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f9/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
prints
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
value: <float64 Value>
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Both <code>reflect.Type</code> and <code>reflect.Value</code> have
|
|
|
|
lots of methods to let us examine and manipulate them. One
|
|
|
|
important example is that <code>Value</code> has a
|
|
|
|
<code>Type</code> method that returns the <code>Type</code> of a
|
|
|
|
<code>reflect.Value</code>. Another is that both <code>Type</code>
|
|
|
|
and <code>Value</code> have a <code>Kind</code> method that returns
|
|
|
|
a constant indicating what sort of item is stored:
|
|
|
|
<code>Uint</code>, <code>Float64</code>, <code>Slice</code>, and so
|
|
|
|
on. Also methods on <code>Value</code> with names like
|
|
|
|
<code>Int</code> and <code>Float</code> let us grab values (as
|
|
|
|
<code>int64</code> and <code>float64</code>) stored inside:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f1/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
prints
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
type: float64
|
|
|
|
kind is float64: true
|
|
|
|
value: 3.4
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
There are also methods like <code>SetInt</code> and
|
|
|
|
<code>SetFloat</code> but to use them we need to understand
|
|
|
|
settability, the subject of the third law of reflection, discussed
|
|
|
|
below.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The reflection library has a couple of properties worth singling
|
|
|
|
out. First, to keep the API simple, the "getter" and "setter"
|
|
|
|
methods of <code>Value</code> operate on the largest type that can
|
|
|
|
hold the value: <code>int64</code> for all the signed integers, for
|
|
|
|
instance. That is, the <code>Int</code> method of
|
|
|
|
<code>Value</code> returns an <code>int64</code> and the
|
|
|
|
<code>SetInt</code> value takes an <code>int64</code>; it may be
|
|
|
|
necessary to convert to the actual type involved:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f2/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The second property is that the <code>Kind</code> of a reflection
|
|
|
|
object describes the underlying type, not the static type. If a
|
|
|
|
reflection object contains a value of a user-defined integer type,
|
|
|
|
as in
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f3/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
the <code>Kind</code> of <code>v</code> is still
|
|
|
|
<code>reflect.Int</code>, even though the static type of
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code> is <code>MyInt</code>, not <code>int</code>. In
|
|
|
|
other words, the <code>Kind</code> cannot discriminate an int from
|
|
|
|
a <code>MyInt</code> even though the <code>Type</code> can.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>The second law of reflection</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>2. Reflection goes from reflection object to interface
|
|
|
|
value.</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Like physical reflection, reflection in Go generates its own
|
|
|
|
inverse.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Given a <code>reflect.Value</code> we can recover an interface
|
|
|
|
value using the <code>Interface</code> method; in effect the method
|
|
|
|
packs the type and value information back into an interface
|
|
|
|
representation and returns the result:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
// Interface returns v's value as an interface{}.
|
|
|
|
func (v Value) Interface() interface{}
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
As a consequence we can say
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f3b/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
to print the <code>float64</code> value represented by the
|
|
|
|
reflection object <code>v</code>.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
We can do even better, though. The arguments to
|
|
|
|
<code>fmt.Println</code>, <code>fmt.Printf</code> and so on are all
|
|
|
|
passed as empty interface values, which are then unpacked by the
|
|
|
|
<code>fmt</code> package internally just as we have been doing in
|
|
|
|
the previous examples. Therefore all it takes to print the contents
|
|
|
|
of a <code>reflect.Value</code> correctly is to pass the result of
|
|
|
|
the <code>Interface</code> method to the formatted print
|
|
|
|
routine:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f3c/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
(Why not <code>fmt.Println(v)</code>? Because <code>v</code> is a
|
|
|
|
<code>reflect.Value</code>; we want the concrete value it holds.)
|
|
|
|
Since our value is a <code>float64</code>, we can even use a
|
|
|
|
floating-point format if we want:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f3d/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
and get in this case
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
3.4e+00
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Again, there's no need to type-assert the result of
|
|
|
|
<code>v.Interface()</code> to <code>float64</code>; the empty
|
|
|
|
interface value has the concrete value's type information inside
|
|
|
|
and <code>Printf</code> will recover it.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
In short, the <code>Interface</code> method is the inverse of the
|
|
|
|
<code>ValueOf</code> function, except that its result is always of
|
|
|
|
static type <code>interface{}</code>.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Reiterating: Reflection goes from interface values to reflection
|
|
|
|
objects and back again.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>The third law of reflection</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>3. To modify a reflection object, the value must be settable.</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The third law is the most subtle and confusing, but it's easy
|
|
|
|
enough to understand if we start from first principles.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Here is some code that does not work, but is worth studying.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f4/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
If you run this code, it will panic with the cryptic message
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
panic: reflect.Value.SetFloat using unaddressable value
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The problem is not that the value <code>7.1</code> is not
|
|
|
|
addressable; it's that <code>v</code> is not settable. Settability
|
|
|
|
is a property of a reflection <code>Value</code>, and not all
|
|
|
|
reflection <code>Values</code> have it.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The <code>CanSet</code> method of <code>Value</code> reports the
|
|
|
|
settability of a <code>Value</code>; in our case,
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f5/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
prints
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
settability of v: false
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
It is an error to call a <code>Set</code> method on an non-settable
|
|
|
|
<code>Value</code>. But what is settability?
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Settability is a bit like addressability, but stricter. It's the
|
|
|
|
property that a reflection object can modify the actual storage
|
|
|
|
that was used to create the reflection object. Settability is
|
|
|
|
determined by whether the reflection object holds the original
|
|
|
|
item. When we say
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f6/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
we pass a <em>copy</em> of <code>x</code> to
|
|
|
|
<code>reflect.ValueOf</code>, so the interface value created as the
|
|
|
|
argument to <code>reflect.ValueOf</code> is a <em>copy</em> of
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code>, not <code>x</code> itself. Thus, if the
|
|
|
|
statement
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f6b/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
were allowed to succeed, it would not update <code>x</code>, even
|
|
|
|
though <code>v</code> looks like it was created from
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code>. Instead, it would update the copy of <code>x</code>
|
|
|
|
stored inside the reflection value and <code>x</code> itself would
|
|
|
|
be unaffected. That would be confusing and useless, so it is
|
|
|
|
illegal, and settability is the property used to avoid this
|
|
|
|
issue.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
If this seems bizarre, it's not. It's actually a familiar situation
|
|
|
|
in unusual garb. Think of passing <code>x</code> to a
|
|
|
|
function:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
f(x)
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
We would not expect <code>f</code> to be able to modify
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code> because we passed a copy of <code>x</code>'s value,
|
|
|
|
not <code>x</code> itself. If we want <code>f</code> to modify
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code> directly we must pass our function the address of
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code> (that is, a pointer to <code>x</code>):</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
<code>f(&x)</code>
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
This is straightforward and familiar, and reflection works the same
|
|
|
|
way. If we want to modify <code>x</code> by reflection, we must
|
|
|
|
give the reflection library a pointer to the value we want to
|
|
|
|
modify.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Let's do that. First we initialize <code>x</code> as usual
|
|
|
|
and then create a reflection value that points to it, called
|
|
|
|
<code>p</code>.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f7/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The output so far is
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
type of p: *float64
|
|
|
|
settability of p: false
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The reflection object <code>p</code> isn't settable, but it's not
|
|
|
|
<code>p</code> we want to set, it's (in effect) <code>*p</code>. To
|
|
|
|
get to what <code>p</code> points to, we call the <code>Elem</code>
|
|
|
|
method of <code>Value</code>, which indirects through the pointer,
|
|
|
|
and save the result in a reflection <code>Value</code> called
|
|
|
|
<code>v</code>:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f7b/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Now <code>v</code> is a settable reflection object, as the output
|
|
|
|
demonstrates,
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
settability of v: true
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
and since it represents <code>x</code>, we are finally able to use
|
|
|
|
<code>v.SetFloat</code> to modify the value of
|
|
|
|
<code>x</code>:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f7c/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The output, as expected, is
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Reflection can be hard to understand but it's doing exactly what
|
|
|
|
the language does, albeit through reflection <code>Types</code> and
|
|
|
|
<code>Values</code> that can disguise what's going on. Just keep in
|
|
|
|
mind that reflection Values need the address of something in order
|
|
|
|
to modify what they represent.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Structs</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
In our previous example <code>v</code> wasn't a pointer itself, it
|
|
|
|
was just derived from one. A common way for this situation to arise
|
|
|
|
is when using reflection to modify the fields of a structure. As
|
|
|
|
long as we have the address of the structure, we can modify its
|
|
|
|
fields.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
2012-03-27 03:53:16 -06:00
|
|
|
Here's a simple example that analyzes a struct value, <code>t</code>. We create
|
|
|
|
the reflection object with the address of the struct because we'll want to
|
|
|
|
modify it later. Then we set <code>typeOfT</code> to its type and iterate over
|
|
|
|
the fields using straightforward method calls
|
|
|
|
(see <a href="/pkg/reflect/">package reflect</a> for details).
|
|
|
|
Note that we extract the names of the fields from the struct type, but the
|
|
|
|
fields themselves are regular <code>reflect.Value</code> objects.
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f8/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
The output of this program is
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
0: A int = 23
|
|
|
|
1: B string = skidoo
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
There's one more point about settability introduced in
|
|
|
|
passing here: the field names of <code>T</code> are upper case
|
|
|
|
(exported) because only exported fields of a struct are
|
|
|
|
settable.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Because <code>s</code> contains a settable reflection object, we
|
|
|
|
can modify the fields of the structure.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
{{code "/doc/progs/interface2.go" `/START f8b/` `/STOP/`}}
|
2012-02-29 16:05:51 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
And here's the result:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
t is now {77 Sunset Strip}
|
|
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
If we modified the program so that <code>s</code> was created from
|
|
|
|
<code>t</code>, not <code>&t</code>, the calls to
|
|
|
|
<code>SetInt</code> and <code>SetString</code> would fail as the
|
|
|
|
fields of <code>t</code> would not be settable.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p><b>Conclusion</b></p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Here again are the laws of reflection:
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<ol>
|
|
|
|
<li>Reflection goes from interface value to reflection
|
|
|
|
object.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>Reflection goes from reflection object to interface
|
|
|
|
value.</li>
|
|
|
|
<li>To modify a reflection object, the value must be settable.</li>
|
|
|
|
</ol>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
Once you understand these laws reflection in Go becomes much easier
|
|
|
|
to use, although it remains subtle. It's a powerful tool that
|
|
|
|
should be used with care and avoided unless strictly
|
|
|
|
necessary.
|
|
|
|
</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>
|
|
|
|
There's plenty more to reflection that we haven't covered —
|
|
|
|
sending and receiving on channels, allocating memory, using slices
|
|
|
|
and maps, calling methods and functions — but this post is
|
|
|
|
long enough. We'll cover some of those topics in a later
|
|
|
|
article.
|
2012-03-08 06:39:20 -07:00
|
|
|
</p>
|