[swift-evolution] Proposal: Pattern Matching Partial Function (#111)

[Thorsten Seitz]

> Am 04.02.2016 um 19:31 schrieb Maximilian Hünenberger via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org>:
> 
> I definitely see the point against dictionaries but I’m afraid of the actual pattern matching in "cases".
> 
> match(1) {
>     case 1, 3: 10
>     case 2, 4: 20
>     default: 30
> }
> 
> // with "cases"
> 
> match(1) { cases
>     1, 3: 10,
>     2, 4: 20,
>     default: 30
> }
> 
> // it is very hard to disambiguate between pattern and return value even though for the compiler it could be doable
> match(1) { cases
>     1, 3: 10, 2, 4: 20, default: 30
> }
> 
> 
> There should be a more visible distinction between two "case-item-map"

That's why I am against "cases". The visual distinction is nicely provided by "case". No need for something else IMO.

-Thorsten 


> like "|". But we have to consider "expression-patterns" where operators (like "|") are ambiguous.
> 
> - Maximilian
> 
>> Am 04.02.2016 um 18:48 schrieb Paul Ossenbruggen <possen at gmail.com>:
>> 
>> That is a good point and I forgot about that. There are frequent cases where what I am dealing with is not hashable and it is generally a lot of work to make it hashable, including adding a heading function which if done wrong, can lead to errors.  
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Feb 4, 2016, at 8:38 AM, Charles Constant via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I still vote for keeping "cases"
>>> 
>>>> I see it as a replacement for dictionary literal "pattern matching":
>>>> [1 : "one", 2 : "two", 3 : "three"][1] ?? "undefined"
>>> 
>>> A dictionary needs keys that are Hashable. A dictionary produces an optional. We've discussed this, and more, earlier in the thread.
>>> 
>>>> Even though it would be nice to have but I don’t think that I would use it frequently.
>>> 
>>> Granted, it's a bit ugly, but given the choice, I would pick "cases" over "case case case case ..." every time.
>>> 
>>>> In addition, to be more consistent with "case", "cases" would introduce pattern matching which doesn’t seem right with this concise syntax.
>>> 
>>> I haven't thought this through. It just bums me out a little to replace the switch with something that still has imho unnecessary verbosity.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160205/3788e9c4/attachment.html>