There are two different concerns in what people refer to as "pattern matching": binding and flow-control. Destructuring only addresses binding. Pattern matching emphasizes flow control, and some binding features typically come along for free with whatever syntax it uses. (But you could in principle have flow control without binding.)
On Friday, January 27, 2017 at 1:04:04 AM UTC-6, Didier wrote: > > Some languages have pattern matching, and Clojure is said to not have it > (without a library), but it does have destructuring. > > It seems to me that destructuring is the same as pattern matching, except > that it can only be used inside function arguments, where as pattern > matching can also be used when assigning a value or inside case switch > statements. > > Is that truly the only difference? And if so, why the different > terminology? > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
