New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns
Eric Pailleau
eric.pailleau@REDACTED
Fri Dec 25 10:45:49 CET 2020
Envoyé depuis mon mobile
---- zxq9 a écrit ----
>Looking at this from the perspective of having to read other people's
>code quite a lot, I am pretty unexcited about any changes that would
>introduce glyphy anotations to variable names or move even slightly in
>the direction of allowing rebinding.
>
>Few long-time Erlangers would ever feel a desire to use a feature like
>this, but people who have no idea how the paradigm works are very likely
>to overuse it to a fault, making code a nightmare to sort through. This
>particular change with the ^ isn't so bad (but why not just use a new
>name? Y becomes Y1 or NewY or NextY instead of ^Y? I usually prefer
>something that is at least *descriptive* anyway like PopulatedY or
>FilteredY or whatever. The keystrokes are free...) but again, moving in
>the direction of rebinding is really pushing things in a crazy direction.
>
>I find Erlang's approach to strict single assignment one of its greatest
>benefits because I can sort through convoluted code written by newcomers
>*much* faster than I can in most other languages specifically because I
>can know for certain where a value came from at a glance.
>
>-Craig
>
>On 2020/12/25 7:36, Tristan Sloughter wrote:
>> I'd much prefer if `^` was used to allow rebinding. But I know that
>> would be too confusing since Elixir went with ^ to mean regular binding.
>> So maybe `!`?
>>
>> But this change just lets you add the `^` while not changing how
>> anything works? That sounds like it'll cause a lot of confusion when
>> reading since sometimes a bind is using `^` and sometimes they aren't
>> but it is doing the same thing...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20201225/1d531cf8/attachment.htm>
More information about the erlang-questions
mailing list