On 4/11/12 1:52 PM, Benjamin Striegel wrote:
Really not a fan of the alternative `if` syntax, and I think that the
problem of "too many braces" applies primarily to `alt` expressions
anyway. Another reason to be wary of your `if` proposal is that it makes
Rust's already-a-little-scary semicolon rules a bit harder to express
("you don't need a semicolon after a closing brace in a control flow
expression statement that is not a component of a larger statement" is
already about at the threshold of credulity without adding "...or
immediately after an `if` statement making use of the alternative syntax").

An alternative `alt` syntax could be cool. One thing that I like about
the current syntax with the required braces is that it flows nicely from
the understanding "this is the end of a block, therefore this is where
the implicit `ret` exists", which is handy enough that it helps get over
the initial anxiety of semicolon significance. What if your alternative
syntax used a colon rather than a fat arrow, to mirror record literal
syntax?

Requires unbounded lookahead due to type annotations in patterns also using ":".

Patrick
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev

Reply via email to