Re: [Bro-Dev] [Proposal] Language extensions for better Broker support

> On Dec 11, 2016, at 5:49 AM, Matthias Vallentin wrote: > > In Bro, one way to represent represent errors would be as a record with > an optional error field. If the field is set, an error took place and > one can examine it. Either the function returns one of these

Re: [Bro-Dev] [Proposal] Language extensions for better Broker support

> Personally, I see this more as a question of readability (as opposed > to typeability :). But it's a matter of taste, and I'd be fine with > using "as" instead of "cast<>". Probably aligned with that thought is consistency and intuition: we don't have C++-style angle brackets in Bro, so "as"