On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 03:12:05AM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 04:29:55PM -0700, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote: > > On 2020-05-31 04:58, Peter Pentchev wrote: > > > > > So my beef is when you feed these guys an undefined > > > > > variable, that they needs to tell you it requires > > > > > a "defined" variable. Not a bunch of useless rubbish. > > > > > For example (useless rubbish): > > > And also... I thought I mentioned this before. You want a more clear > > > error message for*one* *single* specific case of a "can't find this > > > method, did you mean one of these?" error message. I tried to explain > > > that this error message is one that is displayed in many cases, not only > > > for "you passed an undefined thing, I want a defined thing"; in my > > > opinion, it is actually quite helpful in that it actually lists > > > the candidates in a "did you mean one of these?" style. > > > > > > You want it to be clear if you pass an undefined value where a defined > > > value was expected; that would mean that somebody would have to write > > > the code to make it check whether it is this very specific case and then > > > that code would have to be maintained for years and years. Tomorrow > > > you'll say "but can't it give me a more clear message when I pass an > > > integer and it expected a string?" and the day after tomorrow you'll say > > > "but can't it give me a more clear message when I pass a string and it > > > expected a function?". > > > > > > The error message says "you passed an object of this type, and I can't > > > find this method for this type; here are a couple of types that have > > > this method, did you mean one of these?" It tells you what the types > > > are, and it doesn't have to have thousands of special cases. It tells > > > you what the types are. > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > I like that you in-line and bottom post. You are a lot > > easier to follow. > > > > I think are talking at cross purposes. Let me give an > > example: > > > > Q: is a "cow" a "Plant"? > > A: a "cow" in not a hazel nut > > A: a "cow" in not a radish > > A: a "cow" in not a carrot > > A: a "cow" in not a cabbage > > ... > > > > Are all of the answers a correct? > > Yes.. Evey answer is completely correct. > > > > Are any of the answers helpful? > > No > > Right. So, once again, just as I said, you are only interested in one of > the answers - "Str:U is not a Str:D, you want a Str:D". However, how > should Raku know *which* one of the answers you are interested in? > Tomorrow you may pass an integer to a function that only accepts strings > and floating-point numbers; should Raku tell you "you must pass a > string, not an integer" or "you must pass a floating-point number, not > an integer"? Raku doesn't know which one of those you meant.
...accepts strings *or* floating-point numbers, of course... G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.net r...@debian.org p...@storpool.com PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
