Is case var(var x, var y) a valid syntax ?

[forax at univ-mlv.fr]

> De: "Guy Steele" <guy.steele at oracle.com>
> À: "Alan Malloy" <amalloy at google.com>
> Cc: "Remi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr>, "amber-spec-experts"
> <amber-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Lundi 7 Septembre 2020 17:51:06
> Objet: Re: Is case var(var x, var y) a valid syntax ?

> I agree with Alan. While I believe that Rémi is correct insofar as you can write
> “var” in place of a type in any type pattern “T x”, in a deconstruction pattern
> “P(...) [d]” the occurrence of P is not a type; rather, it names a
> deconstructor. It does so happen that right now all deconstructors (like all
> constructors) share the name of an associated type, but it is important not to
> confuse them. You cannot replace a deconstructor name with “var” any more than
> you can write “new var()” or “new MyInterface()”.
hum, technically you can write 
new MyInterface() { ... } 

I disagree with that rational because a deconstructor is an instance method, so you need to do an instanceof first, 
said differently P(...) is a deconstruction pattern which is equivalent to instanceof P p && var values = p.__name_of_the_deconstructor() 

> From Brian, 
> There are about a zillion places where you can use types and can’t use var: array elements, import statement, type parameters, etc. this is just one of those. 

There is a good reason to not use var for all of them, i believe. 

> —Guy

Rémi 

>> On Sep 7, 2020, at 5:36 AM, Alan Malloy <amalloy at google.com> wrote:

>> I would be very surprised if that were valid. The inner vars are fine, of
>> course. However, your outer one has not replaced a type, but a deconstructor
>> reference, or whatever we're calling the opposite of a constructor. "Any object
>> which can be deconstructed into two constituent objects" will surely not be a
>> useful query very often, and I wouldn't expect the language to support it.

>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2020, 1:24 AM Remi Forax < [ mailto:forax at univ-mlv.fr |
>> forax at univ-mlv.fr ] > wrote:

>>> Just a question,
>>> do we agree that the syntax below is valid ?

>>> Point point = ...
>>> switch(point) {
>>> case var(var x, var y): ...
>>> }

>>> i.e. that var can be written everywhere there is a type in a Pattern.

>>> Rémi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/attachments/20200907/fb909e4b/attachment.htm>