> On 24 Oct 2016, at 21:55, Haravikk via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 24 Oct 2016, at 21:38, Martin Waitz via swift-evolution >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> When using a pattern match operator, I’d prefer to reverse its arguments: >> >> if value matches pattern … >> >> if result =~ .success(let x) { use(x) } >> >> Being used to pattern matching in functional languages, I also do like our >> current syntax. >> Using ~= together with `let` on the left looks very strange to me. > > That's interesting point, it does kind of make more sense that way round, but > I wonder if we were to d that a keyword might be even better than an operate, > like:
Should read as; "that's an interesting point, it does kind of make more sense
that way round, but I wonder if were to do that if a keyword might be even
better than an operator"
i.e- like a sane person who proof-reads e-mails might have written it.
> if result matches .success(let x) { use(x) }
> if result matches let x? { use(x) }
>
> And so-on? Maybe matches isn't the right keyword; we could even re-use the is
> keyword for something shorter (and just think of a type as a form of
> pattern)? I could like the idea of doing:
>
> if result is let x? { use(x) }
>
> My reasoning being that a keyword makes it much more obvious what's going on
> as it can read like natural language to convey that it's a form of matching,
> wheres ~= as an operator still requires some learning if you've not seen
> something similar in another language.
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
