New pattern matching doc

forax at univ-mlv.fr forax at univ-mlv.fr
Mon Jan 18 08:17:49 UTC 2021


> De: "Brian Goetz" <brian.goetz at oracle.com>
> À: "Remi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr>
> Cc: "amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Vendredi 15 Janvier 2021 19:45:21
> Objet: Re: New pattern matching doc

> Back in August ( [
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/2020-August/002342.html
> |
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/2020-August/002342.html
> ] ), I posted something about how we should engage on this list, because we
> fell into one of the classic traps:

>> So, what happened is what always happens on mailing lists -- I put out a
>> multi-page writeup reflecting hundreds of hours of research and incorporating
>> years of discussion, and 99% of the discussion was a too-loud, back-and-forth
>> thread on a relatively uninteresting corner case on the subject of whatever
>> happened to be the first strongly-stated opinion.

> And that this common phenomena has a bad side-effect
I think you have to think a little bit like us, at least like me, we get a long document, that touch multiple parts of the future spec and i'm still looking for how the different pieces fit together. 
So how do i know if something is a corner case or not ? 

[...] 

> We're now deep in a sub-thread on translation (which I even asked we not talk
> about now), which isn't really even about translation, but really seems to be
> about lobbying for a preferred form of expression in the user model:

>> pattern method decompose itself nicely to tuples + two new keywords match and
>> no-match.

> So please (everyone, not just Remi): can we just start again here? This document
> reflects a deep statement about the role of pattern matching in the language.
> There will be ample time to discuss how it is surfaced, but until we have a
> shared understanding of the model and where we're going, I don't think it makes
> sense to talk about how it is expressed or implemented. (Trust me, I've thought
> about these things too.) There's a method to my madness here; this is a big
> topic, and I want to nail down where we're going before we talk about how we
> get there. Shared understanding first.

> If you think this direction is all wrong and this direction is complete garbage,
> it's OK to say that (constructively), but otherwise, please, we're off the
> trail, and I would like to get back on -- and get ALL of us on together.
Again, at least in my case, the problem is not if this direction is garbage or not but that i don't fully understand the document you sent to us. 

Questions like what is the relationship between a deconstruction pattern and a static pattern ? Is there several form of static patterns ? What a guard is ? etc. 
All these questions are important to understand the document you have sent. 

regards, 
Rémi 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/amber-spec-experts/attachments/20210118/7717e1f7/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the amber-spec-experts mailing list