Re: [elixir-core:10605] Re: Introduce :let in for-comprehensions

Heya > Put yourself into the shoes of someone starting with Elixir and having to solve this problem. How many concepts do you have to learn to get this (allegedly simple) task done? This is the point of view from which I wrote my email- I think this proposal increases the amount of knowledge a

Re: [elixir-core:10597] Introduce :let in for-comprehensions

Heya My initial impression is that this is quite a large departure from the semantics of all other constructs in the language, and the usual rules for reading Elixir no longer apply. The "return value" of a loop block is no longer the final line of the block, it could be spread throughout it. To

Re: [elixir-core:10078] [Proposal] Syntax for overriding map/struct typespec field

Hello! Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this isn't something that Erlang typespecs support, or at least there is no syntax for it. What do you see this compiling to? Elixir has to work with the capability of Erlang here. Cheers, Louis On Fri, 5 Feb 2021, 22:39 Bernardo Amorim, wrote: >

Re: [elixir-core:9906] [Proposal] Inspection using a function

Heya "apply" is the name I first thought of here. In fact I've tried to use apply like this before! Cheers, Louis On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, 20:22 Austin Ziegler, wrote: > Couldn’t this be a special case of `Kernel.apply/2`? > > ```elixir > @spec apply(fun | any, list(any) | fun) :: any > def

Re: [elixir-core:9903] [Proposal] Inspection using a function

be a problem if we want to introduce a polymorphic > monadic then in the future in Kernel. > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 2:26 PM Louis Pilfold wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> As a data point JavaScript, TypeScript, Rust, Gleam, and >> Rescript/ReasonML/Bucklescript all u

Re: [elixir-core:9901] [Proposal] Inspection using a function

Hello! As a data point JavaScript, TypeScript, Rust, Gleam, and Rescript/ReasonML/Bucklescript all use then or and_then as the name for that monadic function in their standard libraries. It seems to be a fairly common name these days so I'd probably favour using a different one to avoid any

Re: [elixir-core:9467] Proposal: [DDD] A new operator for making tagged tuples to express domain business rules for data of primitive types.

Hiya While I'm a big fan of editor customising I think it's important to make technology as accessible as possible. Maybe people (most?) will not know how to either type these characters with their keyboard or know how to configure their editor to enter them on their behalf. Adoption will be slow

Re: [elixir-core:9285] Re: Normalize compile errors and warnings

Github Actions in this pull request: > https://github.com/actions/setup-elixir/pull/11 > And i will be glad to make a collaboration in the core of elixir if you > all allow me to do so. > > El mié., 27 de nov. de 2019 a la(s) 02:59, Louis Pilfold (lo...@lpil.uk) > escribió:

Re: [elixir-core:9281] Re: Normalize compile errors and warnings

Hello! What prevents the tool from attempting to parse both formats and using whichever succeeds? That way this feature can exist without any changes to the compiler. Cheers, Louis On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, 06:11 Mijail Rondon, wrote: > I think i can make the change for that. > > Is on

Re: [elixir-core:9175] Detecting bogus defdelegate options

Hello! What would be the desired behaviour of the `when` option? Cheers, Louis On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 10:51, Thomas Stratmann < thomas.stratm...@9elements.com> wrote: > Hello, > > a coworker tried `defdelegate fun(..), to: SomeModule, when: > some_conditon` the other day. defdelegate does not

Re: [elixir-core:9128] Suggestion Add Rubys tally

I'm a native English speaker and count_by is clearer to me than tally, which I would think of as a way of counting using tally marks without any relation to grouping items before counting. I also like that the name count_by matches group_by, which has similar behaviour. Cheers, Louis On Sat, 5

Re: [elixir-core:8945] Re: [Proposal] identity function

Hi Alexey In this mailing list and in the Elixir community in general we want to create a friendly and welcoming environment. Please refrain from calling people's opinions "insane" and try to be respectful of others. For more information please read the Elixir code of conduct

Re: [elixir-core:8891] [Notions] extend function capture syntax

Hiya Given Elixir has very limited ability to infer information at compile time how will the compiler know which function to capture? It is not possible to create a multiple-arity anonymous function on the BEAM. Cheers, Louis On Tue, 2 Jul 2019, 17:52 Rich Morin, wrote: > I enjoyed reading

Re: [elixir-core:8752] Disable regex precompilation

www.plataformatec.com.br > Skype: jv.ptec > Founder and Director of R > > > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:05 PM Louis Pilfold wrote: > >> I'm not sure a linter would help here as it could only be applied to your >> app code, not that of libraries. >> >>

Re: [elixir-core:8749] Disable regex precompilation

I'm not sure a linter would help here as it could only be applied to your app code, not that of libraries. This approach would mean that any library that uses an regex signal could not be used in the application as they may not work on other Erlang versions. Is that right? On Fri, 10 May 2019,

Re: [elixir-core:8617] Re: Give warning on unused require

Hey Wouldn't it be possible to track if any macros have been used by the requiring module? I'm not familiar with the compiler here but it seems like it is always possible as all information is available at compile time. Cheers, Louis On Mon, 8 Apr 2019, 09:19 Łukasz Niemier, wrote: > Not

Re: [elixir-core:8609] Missing tuple access idioms

Hey We have elem/2, which is quite clear and more concise. We don't need specific functions for each index because we are not limited by a static type system and so the index does not need to be known at compile time. Cheers, Louis On Fri, 5 Apr 2019, 11:29 Mário Guimarães, wrote: > Hello, >

Re: [elixir-core:8537] [Proposal] Simplify @spec def and @spec defp for efficiency and maintenance purpose

Hi As Elixir has reached version 1 there's not going to be a major change of syntax like this. You could implement this as a macro in your own project though :) use MyMacro def add(x :: number(), y :: number()) :: number() do x + y end Cheers, Louis On Wed, 13 Mar 2019, 08:34 , wrote:

Re: [elixir-core:8529] [Proposal] Double pipeline operator ||>

Hi Tom! While it will not be added to core there is no reason why you couldn't implement this functionality in your application or as a library. Elixir does allow custom operators, though the ones you can use is limited so you won't be able to use `||>` `|||>` etc. Perhaps instead your macro

Re: [elixir-core:8449] [Proposal] In DynamicSupervisor, process terminations asynchronously.

Hi Derek Why not spawn a new process and call DynamicSupervisor.terminate_child from there? Perhaps using the Task module. For me this would be preferable to making an async version of the function as (in addition to keeping the DynamicSupervisor API simple) it leaves it up to the caller to

Re: [elixir-core:8444] [Proposal] Map.drop : friendlier error message if atom given instead of list

Hi Perhaps the error message for an unimplemented protocol could be made more friendly. I don't have any suggestions myself, but perhaps Edouard had some ideas for Map.drop that could be generalised to all protocols. Cheers, Louis On Sun, 13 Jan 2019, 12:02 José Valim, wrote: > It would be

Re: [elixir-core:8428] [Proposal] Deprecate unless-else

I might be wrong, but I think the formatter already updates the AST in some places to fix deprecation warnings. On Fri, 4 Jan 2019, 00:57 eksperimental, wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 07:54:44 +0700 > eksperimental wrote: > > > On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 11:25:13 -0800 > > Ryan Winchester wrote: > > >

Re: [elixir-core:8400] Re: Proposal: Inspect for records

Hey Unlike structs there's no guarantee that two records won't be defined with the same name, they are scoped within modules. Cheers, Louis On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 at 13:55 Allen Madsen wrote: > Couldn't you define a method like __record_keys__/0 on the atom in the > defrecord call? > > Allen

Re: [elixir-core:8386] Re: Enum.sum/2

Hi If this function were to exist I think we would need to call it `sum_map/2`, as the combination of `sum` and `map`. Previously we had `Enum.filter_map/2`, though it was deprecated in favour of `Enum.filter/2` and `Enum.map/2`. The trend is that we are removing these combined Enum functions

Re: [elixir-core:8376] Re: Runtime typespecs assertion

avoid a custom way to define specs for that assertions macros. > > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 12:58 AM Louis Pilfold wrote: > >> Hey >> >> The implementation you've given there is expensive and only works for >> lists up to a certain length. >> >> To solve this one

Re: [elixir-core:8374] Re: Runtime typespecs assertion

t; >> Currently, it seems it's resolved, there are only suggestions to improve >> syntax, that are too minor. >> >> Thank everyone for assistance >> >> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 9:15 PM Louis Pilfold wrote: >> >>> Hi Sergiy >>> >>> I'm

Re: [elixir-core:8371] Re: Runtime typespecs assertion

.S. Actually, I've found that `elem` works in guards, so I can define my > guard without pattern matching. That's good for now, but > > func({x, y, z}) when is_atom(x) and is_number(y) and is_binary(z), do: > true > > sounds cooler, IMHO =) > > On Wednesday, November 7, 2018

Re: [elixir-core:8369] Re: Runtime typespecs assertion

lve the problem in a wrong way? > - to estimate how hard is it to implement in a 3rd-party library or does > it require changes to core Elixir/ErlangVM > > Thanks > > > On Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 7:20:47 PM UTC+2, Louis Pilfold wrote: > >> Hi all >> >>

Re: [elixir-core:8367] Re: Runtime typespecs assertion

Hi all The desire for more safety in Elixir is reasonable, both at compile time and at runtime. The core team have previously experimented with introducting a compile time type checking system, and we also have the dialyser and gradualizer tools that can be used with Elixir. Checking at runtime

Re: [elixir-core:8357] [Proposal] Add function Kernel.delete_in/2

Hey How would it know how to delete a value from the given data structure? The Access protocol could be implemented for any term. Cheers, Louis On Sat, 27 Oct 2018, 18:51 Jonathan Arnett, wrote: > It would be useful to have a function that uses the Access protocol to > delete elements within

Re: [elixir-core:8323] [Proposal] Allow guards to be interspersed anywhere in clause heads

Hey > is there a good reason *not* to expand the expressivity of guard clauses in the core of the language beyond that which erlang offers? I've no strong opinion on the proposal, but I'd just like to point out that expressivity has a formal CS definition and implementing this proposal will not

Re: [elixir-core:8321] [Proposal] Allow guards to be interspersed anywhere in clause heads

Hey Macros are more than capable of providing this functionality, you'd just need to define your own `def` like macro that generates the desired function. ``` MyLib.def my_fun(my_var when my_var in [:foo, :bar]) ``` Cheers, Louis On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 at 20:01 Fernando Tapia Rico wrote: >

Re: [elixir-core:8301] Proposal: Comments in AST

Hey I'm a little out of touch with this area, but isn't this what we previously did? I remember comments being stored in meta during the creation of the formatter. Or did I make that up? Cheers, Louis On Mon, 17 Sep 2018 at 19:17 José Valim wrote: > I like the metadata idea a lot, thanks. We

Re: [elixir-core:8293] Proposal: Comments in AST

Hi Steve The formatter extracts comments from Elixir source like so: https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/blob/9cf118bd123deb945be71bf3ea2b48cd271088f0/lib/elixir/lib/code/formatter.ex#L199-L225 This may help you. Cheers, Louis On Sun, 16 Sep 2018 at 17:59 Steve Morin wrote: > Wanted to see

Re: [elixir-core:8269] [Proposal] Mix format multiline pipelines

Hi The formatter will do this when either the pipeline is too long to fit in one line, or if there is at least one newline in the pipeline. Cheers, Louis On Sun, 2 Sep 2018, 20:39 Sofiane Baddag, wrote: > It would be nice to have multiline pipelines formatted automatically with > Mix. > >

Re: [elixir-core:8034] Re: Module inheritance

of putting it directly into the > language, as it seems to me, to be a core-language-feature. > > Cheers, > Boris > > Am Montag, 28. Mai 2018 00:44:31 UTC+2 schrieb Louis Pilfold: >> >> Hi Boris >> >> Regardless of whether this functionality is d

Re: [elixir-core:8030] Re: Module inheritance

Hi Boris Regardless of whether this functionality is desirable, one could implement functionality like this using Elixir's macro system. As such there is no need for it to be a core language feature. If you want it why not implement it and release it as a Hex package? That way you get the

Re: [elixir-core:7994] [Proposal] Crypto module wrapper

Hiya If Erlang crypo module could be improved or superseded I'd like for those improvements implemented in Erlang so all languages on the BEAM can make use of them, rather than just Elixir. Cheers, Louis On Mon, 14 May 2018, 00:09 Griffin Byatt, wrote: > I know the

Re: [elixir-core:7974] Proposal/Enhance for Elixir Formatter: Format Options (for Numbers)

I'd like to offer a counter point in that I think the lack of configuration is one of the best things about the formatter as it stands. Without configuration they're is only one style, and this the is no opportunity for teams to squabble about code style/linter format. It also means that

Re: [elixir-core:7967] Re: Pipe and anonymous functions

It's not that weird when you think about it in terms of the AST that the macro operates on, and not in terms of types. The former would require rewriting the forms into anon function calls, while the latter just prepends a value onto the argument list. `|>` is a very very simple macro that can be

Re: [elixir-core:7931] Coverage by default

I would imagine it would be the same, but using the already included cover tool rather than the ExCoveralls tool. That way there is no need for the core team to adopt and maintain ExCoveralls and this new UI can be used by other BEAM languages as well. Cheers, Louis On Sat, 3 Mar 2018, 23:36

Re: [elixir-core:7926] Proposal: Addition of `either` and `both` operators

Hi What would this add to the language that we don't already have? It seems to overlap with &&, ||, and, or, Enum.any, and Enum.all. I would rather we have fewer ways in the standard library to write the same thing, rather than more, so new people coming to this language have less special cases,

Re: [elixir-core:7914] Introduce Sum Types

t;> too tomorrow if you want them, they have different features and focuses, >>> but the one that immediately comes to mind is: >>> https://github.com/expede/algae >>> >>> Expede on GitHub has a lot of cool and useful little 'core' elixir >>> libraries in

Re: [elixir-core:7910] Enhancement request: parse character offsets for AST node

Hi there Given we have the formatter now I would be tempted to avoid editing strings and instead update the AST of the file, render that to a string, format it and write it back to the file. Would be more reliable. Cheers, Louis On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, 12:11 Serge Smetana,

Re: [elixir-core:7900] Introduce Sum Types

elixir > libraries in my opinion. > > On Feb 24, 2018 06:46, "Louis Pilfold" <louispopin...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I started to implement such a library, but I would much prefer to use an >> existing one. I was unable to find any, wild you be a

Re: [elixir-core:7895] Introduce Sum Types

t;> checks uncovered types of a sum. (If you would for example not cover the >>> None of a Maybe) >>> >>> I think that this could tremendously improve the code quality. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jony >>> >>> Am Freitag, 16. Februar 20

Re: [elixir-core:7887] Coverage by default

Hi Yordis As a counterpoint if this was included by default I would be removing it in every project. I would prefer a minimal base that users can add to easily. Cheers, Louis On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 at 11:41 Yordis Prieto wrote: > I found myself adding excoveralls in

Re: [elixir-core:7882] Introduce Sum Types

Hey Jony Would this involve some form of compile time type checking for these values? If not we already have them in the form of tuples. @type result :: {:ok, string()} | {:error, string()} If you want compile time checks this would be more difficult. I've experimented a little with compile

Re: [elixir-core:7861] Proposal: Add assert_received_exactly to ExUnit

You could just get the entire mailbox as a list and then. assert mailbox == [1, 2, 3] No extra macros required. Cheers, Louis On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, 15:59 José Valim, wrote: > How is that different from asserting each of them was received followed by > a refute_received _?

Re: [elixir-core:7857] mix deps.add || mix add package

why Mix developers choose not to use a >> pure data file for dependencies and application metadata, unlike many other >> languages ? >> >> Thank you >> >> Le 9 févr. 2018 20:20, "Louis Pilfold" <louispopin...@gmail.com> a >> écrit : >> >>>

Re: [elixir-core:7806] Proposal: [ExUnit] with_application_env(key, value, update_fun, fun)

, < michael.schaeferme...@gmail.com> wrote: > It definitely is, thanks Louis! > > Figuring that this is something other people might need as well I wondered > if it was worthwhile to put it ExUnit directly (and make it work with > async). > > > Am Freitag, 26. Januar 2018 16:41:

Re: [elixir-core:7804] Proposal: [ExUnit] with_application_env(key, value, update_fun, fun)

Hi Michael I've written a tiny lib for this -> https://github.com/lpil/temporary-env Perhaps you might find this useful :) Cheers, Louis On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, 14:24 Michael Schaefermeyer, < michael.schaeferme...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey all, > > I regularly find myself changing the Application

Re: [elixir-core:7793] [Proposal] Add async functions definitions

Hi Pedro I would worry that this would result in this use of the Task module becoming the de-facto way to do work concurrently in Elixir. I think that the majority of the time there's a better solution, likely on that involves supervision. I think the need for a shorthand for performing work

Re: [elixir-core:7721] Proposal: mix format to work with EEx files

Hey How would the formatter know what format to use for eex files? It's often HTML but there is no guarantee that is the case. Cheers, Louis On Fri, 29 Dec 2017, 23:40 Steven Blowers, wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks to those involved for their recent work with mix format

Re: [elixir-core:7693] Move Dependency Build files into a seperate location

Hi gang There's a mix task that will remove compiled application code (clean, I think). Run this before caching the build directory :) Cheers, Louis On Tue, 19 Dec 2017, 04:59 Paul Schoenfelder, wrote: > Could you clarify what the issue is? You haven't specified

Re: [elixir-core:7551] [Proposal] operator =~ should support maps

Hey The `assert` macro handles MatchError as well as true/false. > Ideally, in the assertion results, it would highlight the failing key/values as well. This would be a nice addition to ExUnit. I would rather see this than any addition to =~ Cheers, Louis On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 at 13:43

Re: [elixir-core:7464] [Proposal] Converting @type/@spec to contract/asserts at compile time?

Heya You could write a library that does this rather than modifying Elixir. It would be a cool project :) Cheers, Louis On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, 18:06 , wrote: > Hi all! > > I increasingly find myself writing more or less exactly same logic as in > @type/@spec in body of the

Re: [elixir-core:7388] easy dependencies installation

wrote: > But, Louis, isn't abstract syntax tree a way of safely modify elixir code? > For example I could quote all the mix.exs file, find dependencies tuple, > modify it and unquote it back. > > > On Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 12:37:57 AM UTC+3, Louis Pilfold wrote: > >>

Re: [elixir-core:7381] StreamData: data generation and property testing for Elixir

Hey Andrea Looks really nice, looking forward to trying it out. That `check all` trick used to sort-of get a variable arity macro is pretty neat, will have to remember that one :) Cheers, Louis On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 at 16:01 Andrea Leopardi wrote: > Hello folks, > > > I

Re: [elixir-core:7295] easy dependencies installation

Hey Vitaly The dependency file for mix is an Elixir program rather than just a simple JSON file. There's no way reliably and safely programatically modify the mix.exs file as a result. Cheers, Louis On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 at 22:17 Vitaly Shvedchenko < vitaly.shvedche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi

Re: [elixir-core:6889] Re: Sorting maps when inspecting

Hey Amos As I understand it the ordering of maps is an Erlang implementation detail that is not to be relied upon. If you want an ordered dictionary a map probably is not the correct data structure for you. Cheers, Louis On Wed, 15 Feb 2017 at 14:35 Amos King wrote: >

Re: [elixir-core:6666] I think the new 1.4 warning about missing () on zero arity functions is a cure that's worse than the disease

I personally think this is clearer, and I don't feel this is clearer. With this I think it is easier to tell when computation is happening- previously it could be hidden behind what looks like variables. Cheers, Louis On Sat, 3 Dec 2016, 04:42 Dave Thomas, wrote: > I’ve been

Re: [elixir-core:6400] [Proposal] List.unwrap/1

What's the difference between this and List.flatten ? Cheers, Louis On 25 Sep 2016 23:00, "Chris Keele" wrote: > List.unwrap/1 > > is a simple compliment to List.wrap/1––it walks a

Re: [elixir-core:6388] Re: Deprecate 'single quotes for char lists'

Hey I'm +1 so long as single quotes are not then used for strings. I'd much rather avoid disagreements about which style of string syntax to use. Cheers, Louis On 23 Sep 2016 18:17, "Chris Keele" wrote: > I have no strong opinions on this–although I do hope that useful

Re: [elixir-core:6338] Automatically infer the list of applications

Hiya I'm unsure about this proposal. I do think that the name OTP applications is unclear. There are other Erlang OTP applications that are started when not in this list, and the skipped and included applications are OTP applications as well. How does one determine if a production dependency is

Re: [elixir-core:6321] Improvement: the syntax for importing functions from modules

Hello! What is the advantage of the new syntax? To me it seems it only serves to obscure what is actually happening. I don't think adding multiple ways to write the same thing will bring anything other than inconsistency to the language, causing style squabbles and giving newcomers one more

Re: [elixir-core:6309] modules that are required automatically

Functions do not need to be required, only macros :) Cheers, Louis On 13 September 2016 at 13:54, eksperimental wrote: > Thank you José for your answer, > so why is so I don't need to require IO and Enum? > > $ elixir -e "IO.inspect(Enum.at(1..5, 2))" > 3 > > > On

Re: [elixir-core:6223] Elixir way to handle errors in pipes

Hi! with is the right tool when you want this kind of error handling in these function pipelines :) Cheers, Louis On 15 Aug 2016 12:12, "Alvise Susmel" wrote: > Hi, > > I've started thinking about this, as maybe many of you, when I needed to > stop the pipe when an

Re: [elixir-core:6084] Maybe Add A Warning For Including Commas In ~w List

Hey How would I silence the warnings emitted when I have deliberate commas in a w sigil? Cheers, Louis On 12 Jul 2016 00:49, "Onorio Catenacci" wrote: > That is sort of the definition of "warning". If it were obviously wrong it > would be a compiler error. > > Henrik N