> On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:51 AM, Robert Widmann via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Sure.  One of the first gadgets I wrote was a way of destructuring an array 
> into a familiar cons-list kind of enum 
> (https://github.com/typelift/Basis/blob/master/Basis/Array.swift#L9 
> <https://github.com/typelift/Basis/blob/master/Basis/Array.swift#L9>) which 
> you use something like this with other non-trivial enums 
> (https://github.com/typelift/Valence/blob/cf4353c64de93b98c460529b06b8175c9ecfb79b/Tests/SystemF.swift#L161
>  
> <https://github.com/typelift/Valence/blob/cf4353c64de93b98c460529b06b8175c9ecfb79b/Tests/SystemF.swift#L161>).
> 
> It's not strictly a problem for me to lose this feature, but it is gonna be a 
> bit weird if we lose recursive match but also allow it for just plain old 
> tuple patterns.

We’re not discussing taking away recursive match are we?  IIUC the discussion 
is limited to taking away matching all associated values as a single tuple, 
rather than matching each value individually.

> 
> ~Robert Widmann
> 
> 2017/01/22 3:02、Daniel Duan <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> のメッセージ:
> 
>> FWIW, in all public Github repos with 5k+ stars whose language gets 
>> recognized as “Swift”, 576 enum cases has associated values and among them 
>> 55 has 2 values or more. After some very casual grepping I didn’t find a lot 
>> of usage of this particular pattern.
>> 
>> Care to share some examples, Robert?
>> 
>> - Daniel Duan
>> 
>>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 11:00 PM, Robert Widmann <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I find myself doing this a lot, but maybe my problems are just more 
>>> Algebra-shaped than most.  That said, I appreciate this cleanup and lean +1 
>>> (because you mentioned a way to partly keep this behavior).
>>> 
>>> ~Robert Widmann
>>> 
>>> 2017/01/19 18:14、Joe Groff via swift-evolution <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> のメッセージ:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 19, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Daniel Duan <[email protected] 
>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 19, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Joe Groff <[email protected] 
>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jan 19, 2017, at 1:47 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution 
>>>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This looks totally reasonable to me. A couple of comments:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 1) Because this proposal is breaking the link between the associated 
>>>>>>> value of an enum case and tuple types, I think it should spell out the 
>>>>>>> rules that switch statements will use when matching an enum value 
>>>>>>> against a a case with an associated value. Some kind of rules fell out 
>>>>>>> of them being treated as tuple types, but they might not be what we 
>>>>>>> want.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I was about to bring up the same. Right now, an enum pattern works like 
>>>>>> .<identifier> <tuple-pattern>, where the <tuple-pattern> then 
>>>>>> recursively matches the payload tuple. In this model, it seems like we'd 
>>>>>> want to treat it more like .<identifier>(<pattern>, <pattern>, ...). 
>>>>>> Similar to how we lost "tuple splatting" to forward a bunch of 
>>>>>> arguments, we'd have to decide whether we lose the ability to match all 
>>>>>> parts of the payload into a tuple.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I’m leaning towards “no” for simplicity of the language (and 
>>>>> implementation). That means this would be source-breaking 😞.  Will update 
>>>>> the proposal and see how the rest of the feedback goes.
>>>> 
>>>> It'd be a good idea to try to find examples of people doing this out in 
>>>> the wild too, to see how widespread it is as well as how onerous the 
>>>> workarounds for losing the feature would be.
>>>> 
>>>> -Joe
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
>>>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to