On Tue, 3 Nov 2020, Greg Ewing wrote:
On 3/11/20 11:01 am, Ethan Furman wrote:
I believe supporting
case x, x # look ma! no guard!
is a possible future enhancement.
In which case there will be a need for *some* kind of true
"don't care" placeholder. If it's not "_" then it will hav
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020, Ethan Furman wrote:
The problem with any kind of sigil/keyword is that it becomes line noise --
we would have to train ourselves to ignore them in order to see the structure
and variables we are actually interested in. Once we become adept at ignoring
them, we will again
Having followed this discussion for a while, I'm trying to put my finger on
why I feal uneasy about it.
The major features I see in this proposal are:
* New syntax for trying multiple assignments until one matches.
* Extending destructuring assignment to match constants in the LHS.
On Wed, 8 Jul 2020, Rhodri James wrote:
On 08/07/2020 11:05, Federico Salerno wrote:
What I don't like is the use of _ as catch-all, which is different and not
interdependent with its use as throwaway.
Any name used as a pattern is a catch-all. The only difference between "case
dummy:" and
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/25/20 10:42 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
On 26/06/20 1:18 am, Rhodri James wrote:
I will quickly and regularly forget that in this one place, "_" is
special.
You don't have to remember that it's special to understand what
'case _' does. Even if it were
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> The proposal for something like 0xff, 0o664, and 0b1001001 seems like
> the right direction, although 'o' for octal literal looks kind of funky.
> Maybe 'c' for oCtal? (remember it's 'x' for heXadecimal).
Shouldn't it be 0t644 then, and 0n1001001 for bin
