3 ms·

I’ll just cross my fingers for do expressions getting adopted. Before then functions work for me and none of the gist convinced me otherwise.

• UncleEntity 4y ago
  Couldn’t you just: /* do */ { const foo = “bar” do_the_stuff(foo) } /* while(JS_sux) */ Typing code on a phone is hard…
  • eyelidlessness 4y ago
    You can even just use `do { … } while (false)` without comments, but neither is an expression. Neither produce a value. The do expression would have similar encapsulation but allow assigning a derived value to a lhs binding, as you could do in a lisp (or Rust [or Swift, or…]).
    • matthews2 4y ago
      > as you could do in a lisp (or Rust [or Swift, or…]) There's also a GCC extension for this! https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html I'm using this for something a bit like Rust's unwrap (but uglier): #define UNWRAP(expr) \ {{ \ auto result_ = (expr); \ if (!result_.present()) panic(); \ result_.disown(); \ }} optional<int> foo(); void bar() { int val = UNWRAP(foo); }
• stkdump 4y ago
  Isn't a do expression the same + ability for the block to return a value? So what if you don't need to return a value?
  • teg4n_ 4y ago
    Don’t return one then?