On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 15:04 -0700, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
> The workaround is to name the parameter:
>
> receive((S s) {});OK, this works for me as well, which is great. The question now is whether this is a feature or a bug? In terms of the parameter list of a function literal, the names should be there so requiring the name is fixing a bug that was there. In terms of usability in context, if the programmer doesn't use the variable just the fact that an instance of the type was received, then having to give the variable a name is total noise. In this case the old behaviour was right and the change created a new bug. I guess this is a situation where "Walter Decides" ? -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
