New EEP draft: Pinning operator ^ in patterns
Wed Jan 20 16:22:26 CET 2021
On 1/20/21 3:42 PM, Raimo Niskanen wrote:
> I have vague feeling that this has been asked,
> but since I can not find it:
> How is nested fun()s handled?
> foo(Y) ->
> F = fun (X) ->
> Y = X + ^Y,
> FF = fun (Z) ->
> Z + ^Y
> Does the innermost Z + ^Y access the outermost Y from foo(Y), or the Y
> bound in F/1 i.e Y = X + ^Y?
> Is there a way to choose which of the outer Y:s to refer to from within FF/1?
Raimo: Your question about nested funs is a good one.
However, I thought that ^ was meant to be used in *patterns* (this is
even in the subject of this sad thread), and I do not see ^ being used
in patterns in your example.
Am I missing anything?
Are you still of the opinion that this, supposedly "pinning operator"
(which is neither "pinning" anything nor an "operator") makes Erlang
less confusing a language?
När du har kontakt med oss på Uppsala universitet med e-post så innebär det att vi behandlar dina personuppgifter. För att läsa mer om hur vi gör det kan du läsa här: http://www.uu.se/om-uu/dataskydd-personuppgifter/
E-mailing Uppsala University means that we will process your personal data. For more information on how this is performed, please read here: http://www.uu.se/en/about-uu/data-protection-policy
More information about the erlang-questions