3 ms·
There was a conversation on this recently on HN. IIRC jashkenas said he liked the idea but it would be better to encourage library author's to write a functiona
by phzbOx 15y ago
There was a conversation on this recently on HN. IIRC jashkenas said he liked the idea but it would be better to encourage library author's to write a functional style enabling chaining rather than adding a new feature to the language.
Btw, I found that missing too in Python and created Moka (http://www.phzbox.com/moka/ http://www.phzbox.com/moka/ It's still in heavy construction)
- raganwald 15y agoI recall this discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3174442 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3174442 There may be others...
- herge 15y agoSaw your presentation at Montréal-Python, it was very good. Have you played with pointfree (http://markshroyer.com/docs/pointfree/latest/module.html#module-pointfree http://markshroyer.com/docs/pointfree/latest/module.html#mod...)? What do you think about it compared to Moka?
- moomin 15y agoActually, that was in response to a previous request for a dedicate chaining syntax. This syntax is actually more useful for dealing with when chaining is already implemented.