<p>A simplified version of the code:</p>
<pre><code>// package character
type Character struct {Inventory: []item.Ttem}
// package item
type Item struct {Name: string, Actions: action.Action}
// package action
type Action struct {
Names: []string,
Action: func(*character.Character) int
</code></pre>
<p>This causes an import cycle of <code>character -> item -> action -> character</code>
how would you resolve this?</p>
<p>Moving everything into an interface wouldn't work unless they were still in the same package and would require a number of get/set functions.</p>
<hr/>**评论：**<br/><br/>itsmontoya: <pre><p>Why can't they all be part of the same package?</p></pre>ROFLLOLSTER: <pre><p>They can be, it just moves a lot of mostly unrelated code together which I was trying to avoid. Definitely works though.</p></pre>shovelpost: <pre><p>They are not really unrelated. If your project was named <code>foo</code>then it makes total sense to see in the code <code>foo.Character</code> and <code>foo.Action</code>. The package name becomes very descriptive. On the other hand <code>character.Character</code> what does that even mean? We have to go up and look at the import to see that <code>character</code> belongs to project <code>foo</code>, not to mention the stuttering.</p>
<p>Check out the article <a href="https://medium.com/@benbjohnson/standard-package-layout-7cdbc8391fc1" rel="nofollow">Standard Package Layout</a>.</p></pre>ROFLLOLSTER: <pre><p>Thanks, I think that is the approach I'll take.</p>
<p>Edit: It ends up being a lot of code in one package because most of the application in this case is methods on those types rather than things that have external dependencies. I guess that's not too bad.</p></pre>Rudd-X: <pre><p>Put them in the same package but different files, brother.</p></pre>shovelpost: <pre><p>In my opinion these methods belong in the same package unless they call database code or something.</p></pre>TheMerovius: <pre><p>The fact that they import each other contradicts the claim, that the code is unrelated. It's related, it belongs in the same package.</p></pre>JHunz: <pre><pre><code>// package action
type ActionTarget interface {
// Necessary interaction methods
}
type Action struct {
Names: []string,
Action: func(*ActionTarget) int
}
// package character
type Character struct {Inventory: []item.Item}
// implementation of action.ActionTarget for Character
// package item
type Item struct { Name: string, Actions: []action.Action }
</code></pre>
<p>This has the added advantage of being able to implement actions that affect other items or even other actions, rather than being limited to affecting characters.</p></pre>ROFLLOLSTER: <pre><p>That's a really good idea. Thanks.</p></pre>blueblank: <pre><p>A package local interface in item that corresponds to the behavior of action.Action.</p></pre>
