I find the ability to have refutable let more compelling than the
ability to work around it with functions wrapping `match`

On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Carter Schonwald
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Agreed!
>
>
> On Sunday, December 22, 2013, Ziad Hatahet wrote:
>>
>> But we already have Option::unwrap_or() and Option::unwrap_or_else() that
>> behave similar to the 'else' syntax suggested above.
>>
>> --
>> Ziad
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Léo Testard <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Le 22 déc. 2013 à 18:59, Stefan Plantikow <[email protected]> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > Am 22.12.2013 um 16:47 schrieb Gábor Lehel <[email protected]>:
>>> >
>>> > This is a nice idea.  At first I thought it wouldn’t work with `if` but
>>> > in expressions `if` requires `else` so the grammar wouldn’t be ambiguous:
>>> >
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't. As long as the if's "true block" returns unit.
>>> let foo = if ... { }; is perfectly legal, even it doesn't make much sense
>>> in practice.
>>>
>>> Leo
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rust-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rust-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev

Reply via email to