On Mon, 2025-11-24 at 04:06 +0000, kiako via agora-business wrote:
> I vote as follows:
>
> > ID Author AI Name
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > 9261~ Janet 1.5 Further win indirection
> > 9262~ Janet+ 1.0 Land epochs
> > 9263~ 4st 1.0 Truly Indestructible? v2
> > 9264* Janet 3.0 Unique assets
> > 9265* Janet+ 3.0 Somewhat broader decision
> > security
> > 9266~ Mischief 1.5 Repeal Candles
> > 9267~ 4st+ 1.0 Plague!
> > 9268* Janet 3.0 Stealing the moon
> > 9269* 4st+ 3.0 Proposal and Referenda Fixes
> > v2
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ```rust
> // Is this reasonably unambiguous?
> // Surely expecting a player to understand Rust declarative
> // macros is by no means reasonable, but perhaps the syntax
> // `vote!(proposal, ballot)` is self-documenting?
> macro_rules! vote {
> ($proposal:expr, $ballot:expr) => (
> println!(
> "On referenda for proposal {} I vote {}.",
> $proposal, $ballot.
> );
> );
> }
>
> vote!(9261, "PRESENT");
> vote!(9262, "FOR");
> vote!(9263, "PRESENT");
> vote!(9264, "PRESENT");
> vote!(9265, "ENDORSE Janet");
> vote!(9266, "PRESENT");
> vote!(9267, "PRESENT");
> vote!(9268, "PRESENT");
> vote!(9269, "ENDORSE Janet");
> ```
In case it influences any Assessor decisions or CFJs about this: I can
read Rust declarative macros (at least if they aren't too complex) and
this one doesn't do what it might at first look like it does (the
output doesn't resemble a sequence of votes, and I confirmed this using
a Rust compiler).
--
ais523
