What's a struct, but a tuple with some names?
What's computation but state and a transition function between states?
What's computation but a set of functions transformed by simple term rewriting?
Let people enjoy their syntax sugar.
anton
joined 2 years ago
It's a bit of a change but certainly the right thing to do.
My only disagreement with the article is the get/set stuff. I still want to keep something like the old container[index]
syntax, maybe container.[index]
to indicate that it's a form of access. As long as generics go after names, this would not cause ambiguity.
If it's a moving mirror camera* and it's used to take stills it's probably fine, as the sensor is only exposed for a fraction of a second per image.
If you want to film with it or put it in a phone, where it's exposed all the time, it would certainly not be enough.
* I have no clue what they are called in english
27
If you thought missiles were disruptive to trade, wait til you see what policy can do
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
7
[Feature Request, workaround exists] Add to the list of instances opened in app
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
view more: next ›
What? I agree with
function[T]
style generics, and would be willing to change the access syntax to something likecontainer.[index]
, as the dot makes the difference quite clear. Or do you mean the approach to implementing a container or the way the compiler has to transform it into the set operation/mutable access? I didn't think that was such a problem, and I quite like the way it is done in rust, but that approach may be unavailable to many languages.