> But you might see more value than I do in keeping the scope of `s`
> strictly contained to the single match-clause, versus overloading a
> (non-`=`) operator/keyword to denote binding.  I have no
> counter-argument for that.

I tend to prefer just using scoping because it falls out for free
without adding any new concepts to the language.

> As another variant on my proposal: we could just disallow top-level
> =-binding for `let` alone, but leave top-level =-binding for
> `match`.  That's a little ugly, but still preferable to me over
> abusing other keywords.  Would that suit you, as a language user?

I can't think of any harm in *that*.



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

Reply via email to