<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Struct Design on Support Tools</title><link>https://support.tools/tags/struct-design/</link><description>Recent content in Struct Design on Support Tools</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2026 09:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://support.tools/tags/struct-design/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Underscore Field in Go Structs: Beyond Enforcing Named Initialization</title><link>https://support.tools/post/go-underscore-fields-explained/</link><pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2026 09:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://support.tools/post/go-underscore-fields-explained/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;The underscore character (&lt;code&gt;_&lt;/code&gt;) in Go serves several well-known purposes: ignoring unwanted return values, importing packages solely for their side effects, and as a blank identifier in various contexts. However, there&amp;rsquo;s a lesser-known use case: adding an underscore field to a struct. This pattern deserves closer examination as it offers more benefits than simply enforcing named initialization.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;h2 id="understanding-the-underscore-field-pattern"&gt;Understanding the Underscore Field Pattern&lt;/h2&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;rsquo;s start by examining the pattern in question:&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>