code review 6591076: go.net/ipv4: remove arguments from example functions

go.net/ipv4: remove arguments from example functions

The testing packege expects that Example functions in each
package don't take any arguments. Will do so for the safety.

[mikio, 2012-10-04 06:08:46]

Hello golang-dev@googlegroups.com (cc: golang-dev@googlegroups.com),

I'd like you to review this change to
https://code.google.com/p/go.net

[mikio, 2012-10-13 17:15:11]

ping

[iant, 2012-10-13 17:45:02]

This change does more than simply remove the arguments, and it will fail to run
on many systems--e.g., those that don't have an interface "en0" or 911, which
includes the typical GNU/Linux system.  It's not clear to me that this is an
improvement.

[dfc, 2012-10-13 23:52:25]

On 2012/10/13 17:45:02, iant wrote:
> This change does more than simply remove the arguments, and it will fail to
run
> on many systems--e.g., those that don't have an interface "en0" or 911, which
> includes the typical GNU/Linux system.  It's not clear to me that this is an
> improvement.

This worked fine on my linux/arm system (closest to hand). I believe this works
because the example includes no // Output: lines. This is consistent with the
tests that precede it in the file that also use the same setup preamble.

[dfc, 2012-10-13 23:55:23]

I would LGTM this, but looking at the examples in godoc, none of them
are accessible. I'm not sure if this is a problem with the examples,
or godoc.

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 10:52 AM,  <dave@cheney.net> wrote:
> On 2012/10/13 17:45:02, iant wrote:
>>
>> This change does more than simply remove the arguments, and it will
>
> fail to run
>>
>> on many systems--e.g., those that don't have an interface "en0" or
>
> 911, which
>>
>> includes the typical GNU/Linux system.  It's not clear to me that this
>
> is an
>>
>> improvement.
>
>
> This worked fine on my linux/arm system (closest to hand). I believe
> this works because the example includes no // Output: lines. This is
> consistent with the tests that precede it in the file that also use the
> same setup preamble.
>
> https://codereview.appspot.com/6591076/

[minux1, 2012-10-14 08:52:48]

+adg.

On 2012/10/13 23:55:23, dfc wrote:
> [...] but looking at the examples in godoc, none of them
> are accessible. I'm not sure if this is a problem with the examples,
> or godoc.
They aren't shown because their names don't follow the normal
example naming convention (see `godoc testing`). And godoc only
shows ExampleF(), ExampleT(), and ExampleT_M()-type examples.

However, i think these free form examples are necessary and
useful (some types/functions is meant to work together, and it's
just unreasonable to provide separate examples for them).

I propose we add a separate standalone examples (or complex
examples) section to lib/godoc/godoc.html for those examples
that are not bonded to one specific function/type/method.

[mikio, 2012-10-16 07:00:22]

Thanks for comments, iant, dfc and minux.
Looks like addressed questionable things on this CL are;

Q1.  Example functions should run wherever go runs
No: because go testing says "Example functions without output comments are
compiled but not executed."
Yes: because it's expected as copy-n-paste examples

Q2. Example functions should be compliant with go testing and/or godoc
No: free forms are necessities for consolidated example functions
Yes: because godoc dislikes free forms

Hm, well... okay.
I'll follow adg's opinion because examples are part of godoc.

[mikio, 2012-11-16 10:50:51]

hello adg, ping.

[adg, 2012-11-30 12:33:34]

LGTM

[mikio, 2012-11-30 16:06:14]

*** Submitted as
https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=3f49abc52b3c&repo=net ***

go.net/ipv4: remove arguments from example functions

The testing packege expects that Example functions in each
package don't take any arguments. Will do so for the safety.

R=iant, dave, minux.ma, adg
CC=golang-dev
https://codereview.appspot.com/6591076