New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns

Michael P. empro2@REDACTED
Thu Jan 28 15:10:29 CET 2021


On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 18:57:04 +0900
zxq9 <zxq9@REDACTED> wrote:

> Doubleplus ungood.

Right, because:

> because they were confusingly implemented and a total mess. C++ comes to

Have you ever realised?

   `C != C++` => false <#> true

Contradiction! => name is wrong!

   `C != ++C` => true <=> true

The name is still wrong, because that would be a good name
for Objective-C, whereas "C++" should be called

{[C * (0.95 + operator)]^templates * class + friends}/

Or, as I usually shorten it: _assembler with classes_ ...

> unfeatures that the first thing any project manage must determine is
> what subset of the stupid language is the "safe" subset. This isn't the

     > 2) Some keep quiet and add it to their version of
       _Erlang - The bad parts_ -- apparently without fear
       of it growing into _Erlang - The good parts_.

I say, I say, I say

> Python retained its crown for so long by *refusing* feature additions,
> and is now likely doomed to a Java/C++-esque future now that Guido quit

Funny! When I looked at the PEP for additional info on the EEP,
I got a feeling that Python had begun to die. With its current use
in "data" stuff, it might first aquire a broken half of R ...

> over the ridiculous "walrus operator" (yet another glyphy bit of
> uselessness that has an utterly non-obvious name that confounds newcomers).

Here's some for Python and Elixir, Java, assembler with classes, ...

;=   winking walrus
?:=  confused walrus
:,=  weeping walrus
X=   extinct walrus

Hey, that's even a little story ... (never mistake the wrapping for the present :-)



¡Menos economia! - ¡Mas econotuya!

Less economy! - More econoyou!

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list