|
|
|
|
|
|
by leshow
1254 days ago
|
|
|
What you find "clever" or not is really a function of what you are most used to seeing. There are likely many folks who use combinators frequently who find them easier to read, myself included. The first example, to me, is the worst of all worlds, if you want to be explicit use `match`. Otherwise, having a condition then using `unwrap` just feels like it's needlessly complicated for no reason... Just adding my subjective assessment to the bikeshed. |
|
|
In the first example—the longer, tedious one—I have to look at the condition to make sure the resulting `unwrap`s never actually happen, and if I reason about it wrong I get an application panic.
The above is 100% clear, can obviously never panic, trivially produces optimal code, and is how you'd write the exact same operation to add elements between sets, arrays, or anything else iterable.People act like the above requires a Ph.D. in Haskell when it really requires about fifteen minutes of playing around with basic functional concepts that are in at least half the popular programming languages these days. At which point you realize a ton of annoyingly tedious problems can be solved in one line of code that can be easily comprehended by anyone else who's done the same thing.
It's the same thing as driving on the highway. Anyone driving slower than you is an idiot, anyone driving faster than you is a maniac.