Pair/tuple data type in Go

Question

You can do this. It looks more wordy than a tuple, but it's a big improvement because you get type checking.

Edit: Replaced snippet with complete working example, following Nick's suggestion. Playground link: http://play.golang.org/p/RNx_otTFpk

package main

import "fmt"

func main() {
    queue := make(chan struct {string; int})
    go sendPair(queue)
    pair := <-queue
    fmt.Println(pair.string, pair.int)
}

func sendPair(queue chan struct {string; int}) {
    queue <- struct {string; int}{"http:...", 3}
}

Anonymous structs and fields are fine for quick and dirty solutions like this. For all but the simplest cases though, you'd do better to define a named struct just like you did.

There is no tuple type in Go, and you are correct, the multiple values returned by functions do not represent a first-class object.

Nick's answer shows how you can do something similar that handles arbitrary types using interface{}. (I might have used an array rather than a struct to make it indexable like a tuple, but the key idea is the interface{} type)

My other answer shows how you can do something similar that avoids creating a type using anonymous structs.

These techniques have some properties of tuples, but no, they are not tuples.

You could do something like this if you wanted

package main

import "fmt"

type Pair struct {
    a, b interface{}
}

func main() {
    p1 := Pair{"finished", 42}
    p2 := Pair{6.1, "hello"}
    fmt.Println("p1=", p1, "p2=", p2)
    fmt.Println("p1.b", p1.b)
    // But to use the values you'll need a type assertion
    s := p1.a.(string) + " now"
    fmt.Println("p1.a", s)
}

However I think what you have already is perfectly idiomatic and the struct describes your data perfectly which is a big advantage over using plain tuples.