> I think reusing syntax for existing operator in completely unrelated
context is a big mistake.
I keep hearing that, I agree, but adding keywords presents it's own
problems.
The keywords can always be changed, maybe they can be a voting option even.
Cheers
Joe
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > Please steer clear of using the assert API, and in so doing avoid BC
> > concerns with the current assert API.
>
> The operator can be called something other than "assert", I'm sure the
> thesaurus has a lot of possibilities.
>
> > Please avoid adding a magic method and use the suggested syntax for
> > invariant.
> >
> > class Some {
> > require(invariant-expr);
>
> I think reusing syntax for existing operator in completely unrelated
> context is a big mistake. Having code outside of functions is probably
> not the best idea too.
>
> --
> Stas Malyshev
> smalys...@gmail.com
>
