[erlang-questions] Matthew Sackman's "cut" proposal
Tue Jul 12 01:00:39 CEST 2011
On 11/07/2011, at 9:26 PM, Gleb Peregud wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 07:34, Richard O'Keefe <ok@REDACTED> wrote:
>> Here are the counts. funs may be ruled out for multiple
>> reasons; in each such case only the most severe reason was
> Just a quick idea. Will _1, _2, _3, etc. placeholders work for
> positional currying? I'm guessing that it might be possible to
> implement it in Matt's cut parse transform.
But "arguments in the wrong order" was a *very* rare reason for the
Eiffel 'agents' approach being inapplicable. It adds extra
unreadable complexity while giving almost no benefit whatever.
Why put Band-Aids on the Titanic?
More information about the erlang-questions