[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Incompatibility with pattern matching

Andre van Tonder <andre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I agree that it scales poorly, but the same objection arguably applies to 
> /constructors/ (and parents) with positional arguments, yet these are built 
> into the basic syntax.

Well, but it's much less serious here, as there are typically many
occurrences of an accessor for a single occurrence of a constructor.
Moreover, in the present design, the constructor must always receive a
full slate of arguments.

Furthermore, keywords for constructors can easily be built on top of
what's there, as can keywords (or whatever) for pattern matching.
(But who am I talking to? :-) )

Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla