On 6/6/12 10:23 AM, Graydon Hoare wrote:
I'd also possibly prefer "break" rather than "continue" to get an early-exit from a 'do'. But then, we're still debating what to do for the word "continue" in the grammar anyway (#2229, I still prefer "loop;" there!)
Sure, either one works for me. I don't actually mind whether it's break or continue, as long as there's some way to do it :)
(Does slightly make me think again to the no-scope-end fat-arrow lambdas that were proposed last time we discussed this -- "(x) => expr" -- but I'm not sure if the symmetry with pattern fat-arrow syntax is worth the chattiness cost nor the need for the parser to suspend judgment on tuple-of-ident expressions while parsing. Thoughts?)
Yeah, I think the parsing will become really hairy there, especially if the block lambda arguments grow into patterns. Not to shoot it down, of course, just mentioning that it's an (LA)LR hazard.
Patrick _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
