How To Use Goroutines For Aggregating Data In Golang?! 

🙏

True! Thanks for this.

@kke can you explain how this works:) ?

@kke thank you for this tip!

In this case, you're right. But it's only viable if the number is static (in this example, the size of the buffer is 2). We would've had a different case if it was an unbuffered channel.

Channels are syntactic sugar. Thats all being handled by the compiler.

same question

Usually it depends, whichever function writes to the channel first. If you fetch from a remote resource you don't know what value will be written to the channel first because you don't know the latency, but in this case you know the name will come first since the function sleeps 100 ms and then writes to the channel while the likes function sleeps for 150 and then writes. The order of the function call does not matter since they are concurrent. Hope i was clear :)

@@marinm3869 Yes you are right. But what would happen in the case of an API calls? I would never know how much time it would take. Then how will I know which API call am I reading from the channel. How are we supposed to differentiate the values from the channel?

The waitgroup is used so we know when to close the channel. When I think about it, your approach could also work. But I thought showcasing "ranging over channels" and "sync.Waitgroup" was important.

Third party api

@@anthonygg_ I don't get it?

it is just a demo, you probably don't want to mix the response type with a generic one like any, or you actually can mix it by embracing the usage of a generic type

Girlfriend

​@@anthonygg_you missed the joke damn

I dunno either, but maybe a user defined struct of response and error? Make the chan of that type?

for key := range channel. So your that will be the key you are looking for.

@@anthonygg_ hey mate that wont work... we havent assigned a key:value pair to each of those go routines. tried using make(chan map[string]any, 2) but seems very messy :/

@@anthonygg_ i created a struct respch := make(chan UserStuff, 2) and then in the funcs i used UserStuff{key: "likes", value: 11} and UserStuff{key: "match", value: "ANNA"} which appears to work ok... not sure if there is a cleaner approach.

@@rogerramjet69 You should be good. If you want to discus this more in-depth you maybe join my Discord community. That chats a bit better.

@@rogerramjet69 I think that's a way cleaner approach to be honest, I thought any was really suss. I would create two structs however, `userLikes{likes: int, error: err}` and `userMatch{match: str, error:err}`. This pattern is more intentional and also lets you check for errors.

I have same opinion