|
|
|
|
|
|
by Aardappel
2638 days ago
|
|
|
Yes, ":" appears a bit overloaded, though many of those cases are actually one and the same. What would be more regular sample code? Do you mean just writing "find([ 1, 2, 3 ]) x: x > r" with explicit () and explicit variables? I agree that is easier to read, though the extreme terseness is also a feature.. Yes, everything can be one line, but in this case it would look a bit ugly: def find(xs, fun): (for(xs) x, i: if fun(x): return i); return -1 |
|
|
Yes, amd yes it depends on the purpose. For learning, it can be impossible to parse; redundancy helps distinguish parts and provides a check you got it right.
OTOH for showcasing features, IMHO, the generality of : is a more impressive feature to demo.
Anyway, it's certainly intriguing! And maybe that's the true purpose of showcase code...