[dondraper36]

No, it's not the case and this terminology shouldn't be used as it's confusing and unhelpful.

There are reference types in Go even though this is also not a super popular term. They still follow the pass-by-value semantics, it's just that a pointer is copied. A map is effectively a pointer to hmap data structure.

In the early days of Go, there was an explicit pointer, but then it was changed.

Slices are a 3-word structure internally that includes a pointer to a backing array and this is why it's also a "reference type".

That said, everything is still passed by value and there are no references in Go.

[jxndndnjc]

You are splitting hair, Maps are effectively references.

That's like saying C++ doesn't have references since it's just a pointer being copied around

[tsimionescu]

No, there is a real difference, this is not splitting hairs.

Go is always pass-by-value, even for maps [0]:

  x := map[int]int{1: 2}
  foo(x)
  fmt.Printf("%+v", x) //prints map[1:2]

  func foo(a map[int]int) {
    a = map[int]int{3: 4}
  }

In contrast, C++ references have different semantics [1]:

  std::map<int, int> x {{1, 2}};
  foo(x);
  std::print("{%d:%d}", x.begin()->first, x.begin()->second);
  //prints {3:4}

  void foo(std::map<int, int>& a) {
    a = std::map<int, int> {{3, 4}}; 
  } 

[0] https://go.dev/play/p/6a6Mz9KdFUh

[1] https://onlinegdb.com/j0U2NYbjL

[erik_seaberg]

foo is receiving a mutable reference and it can't modify the map without those changes leaking out permanently to the caller: https://go.dev/play/p/DXchC5Hq8o8. Passing maps by value would have prevented this by copying the contents.

It's a quirk of C++ that reference args can't be replaced but pointer args can.

[tsimionescu]

The point is that the local variable referencing the map is a different entity than the map itself. Foo gets a copy of that local variable, and the copy references the same map object.

And the fact that C++ references can be used for assignment is essentially their whole point, not "a quirk".