I think the risk is that it provides concise support for something you can already do, and costs one feature, and less syntax uniformity.
-
-
Replying to @propensive @missingfaktor
I made some comments about the issues with Dotty's enum design a while ago. Repeating well-known mistakes over and over–this lang is doomed.pic.twitter.com/l1apcbHALL
1 reply 2 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @oxnrtr @missingfaktor
Thanks - that's a more constructive teardown, even though I don't agree with all of it. :)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @propensive @missingfaktor
No problem! Remember that these are only the well-known mistakes–i.e. we already made them in the past. How many new, unknown ones? No idea.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
IMO the proposal adding ordinals to ADT cases is another bizarre choice. None is 0 and Some is 1. Eh?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think this is so that matches can be distinguished with a bytecode switch, rather than a type test, which should improve performance.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Why surface that in userland though?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Where is it exposed in userland? I don't think it is...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I interpreted Alex' tweet as saying a userland `ordinal` method, a la Java, will be added. If not, okay.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think there's probably some way to get that associated ordinal, but there shouldn't be any common use cases for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So in this respect, it is exposed...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.