And because it is nothing else but a usual binding, it's possible to
prefix-in or rename-in as in
(require (prefix-in r: racket/base))
(case 5 [r:else 'ok])
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 7:32 AM Laurent wrote:
>
> Good point. I wasn't sure that would work---it does.
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:28
Good point. I wasn't sure that would work---it does.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:28 PM Jens Axel Søgaard
wrote:
> I suppose you could (re)require it again.
>
> ons. 27. feb. 2019 kl. 14.19 skrev Laurent :
>
>> Wait, that means that in an interactive session, if you ever happen to
>> redefine
I suppose you could (re)require it again.
ons. 27. feb. 2019 kl. 14.19 skrev Laurent :
> Wait, that means that in an interactive session, if you ever happen to
> redefine `else', you can't use `case' anymore?
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:03 AM Ben Greenman
> wrote:
>
>> Here's a suggestion for
Wait, that means that in an interactive session, if you ever happen to
redefine `else', you can't use `case' anymore?
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 5:03 AM Ben Greenman
wrote:
> Here's a suggestion for the docs:
>
> https://github.com/racket/racket/pull/2505
>
> --
> You received this message because
Here's a suggestion for the docs:
https://github.com/racket/racket/pull/2505
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
Previously on this program...
https://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2013-May/thread.html
[racket-dev] else clauses: possible change to match?
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:59 PM Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> Yep, I also spent a non-zero number of years not even realizing "else"
> wasn't a magic
Yep, I also spent a non-zero number of years not even realizing "else"
wasn't a magic literal for match. And then remembering to use _
instead, as Sorawee suggested.
I think this shows why it's usually better for syntax to use
#:keywords instead of literals? If cond and case used #:else, this
I have been bitten by this one too, it is a bit pernicious. Perhaps we
can adjust the documentation to make more clear that `else` isn't
special in `match`?
Robby
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 6:51 PM Sorawee Porncharoenwase
wrote:
>
> I usually use _ for the otherwise case because I usually match on
I usually use _ for the otherwise case because I usually match on an
identifier, so I have an id to refer to the matched value already if I need
to. The only case I don’t use _ is when I compute something inside the
match and also need to use its result:
(match (foo bar)
[... ...]
Ah!
Thank you for pointing this out. I've always thought that `else' is
treated as a keyword in `match' just as what `cond' does. That
explains everything.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 6:35 PM Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
>
> This is because 'case' expects a particular binding for 'else', but you
>
This is because 'case' expects a particular binding for 'else', but you
shadowed it with 'match', which does not treat 'else' differently than any
other identifier.
Sam
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019, 7:33 PM Shu-Hung You <
shu-hung@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> When using a case expression with an
I may be missing something obvious, here, but why are you using the name “else”
to bind the result in the match clause? I usually use the name “other”, which
might solve your problem.
John
> On Feb 25, 2019, at 4:32 PM, Shu-Hung You
> wrote:
>
> When using a case expression with an else
When using a case expression with an else clause in inside a match
expression, the expander complains about case having a bad syntax.
However, the use of case expressions outside of match are fine. Is
there anyway to get around this?
Currently, I just replace it with another match.
#lang
13 matches
Mail list logo
