[swift-evolution] Proposal: Pattern Matching Partial Function

[Paul Ossenbruggen]

In your example of a Dictionary as not being satisfactory, i would also mention it does not do exhaustiveness or uniqueness checks.

> On Jan 18, 2016, at 4:42 PM, Charles Constant <charles at charlesism.com> wrote:
> 
> No worries, Craig! The name is really not a big deal. 
> 
> Thanks to you and Paul for your work on the proposal. I'm really hoping the Swift team accepts it.
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Craig Cruden <ccruden at novafore.com <mailto:ccruden at novafore.com>> wrote:
> It is sitting in the proposal queue - not sure about renaming… but even if I don’t think the proposed name is better.
> 
> The primary part of it is allowing pattern matching within closures (a related to anonymous function - but I don’t generally here reference to partial closures) which encompasses several scenarios.  i.e. a specialized (not general) implementation of a partial function.
> 
> The map on values is a special case to allow this closure to map a single value.  
> 
> If we rename it then the question becomes why are we introducing case statements in an closure - isn’t that were a function block goes?
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2016-01-19, at 6:05:33, Charles Constant <charles at charlesism.com <mailto:charles at charlesism.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Is it too late to rename the proposal? I will never be able to remember it :(
>> 
>> Maybe "Singular Map/Filter/Reduce" or "Item M/F/R"?
>> 
>> Apologies if we already discussed this earlier. Thread is pretty long now, I may have missed it
>> 
>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Craig Cruden <ccruden at novafore.com <mailto:ccruden at novafore.com>> wrote:
>> I have renamed the document - new link is
>> 
>> https://github.com/cacruden/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0023-Pattern-Matching-Partial-Function.md <https://github.com/cacruden/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0023-Pattern-Matching-Partial-Function.md>
>> 
>> I have initiated a pull request…. I think the proposal is sufficient to get to the review stage (which is a week)… so the haggling on the small stuff will likely happen again at that time anyway.
>> 
>> Of course my views may be corrupted by being too close to the proposal :p
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2016-01-18, at 3:04:35, Charles Constant <charles at charlesism.com <mailto:charles at charlesism.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I think examples are convincing, but ideally we would put most of them in separate document. 
>>> 
>>> Though I love reading about programming, I generally do it in a half-assed sort of way. Unless the writing is very blunt and clear, I don't really understand it until I need to do it myself. I doubt I'm the only person here like this. 
>>> 
>>> I badly want this proposal to gain traction (more so every time I find myself writing code that it could improve, which happens daily). I think the proposal ought to be short and sweet. I believe if we hold the reader's attention just long enough for them to understand what we're talking about, they'll be onboard. Once they're hooked, we have our second document with the list of examples.
>>> 
>>> It would also be great to have the "before snippet" and "after snippet" visually arranged side-by-side. I'm guessing markdown doesn't support this :(
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160118/6a3224df/attachment.html>