Re: [RFC] Short Closures 2, aka auto-capture take 3

On Sun, Jun 12, 2022, at 12:54 PM, Mark Baker wrote: > On 12/06/2022 19:21, Larry Garfield wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 9, 2022, at 11:34 AM, Larry Garfield wrote: >> >> A little data: >> >> I used Nikita's project analyzer on the top 1000 projects to get a rough sense of how >> long-closures are used now. All usual caveats apply about such survey data. I was specifically >> looking at how many use statements a closure typically had, and how >> many statements it typically had. Mainly, I am interested in how common "really long closures >> where the developer is likely to lose track of what is and isn't closed over" are. >> >> Total closures: 20052 >> Total used variables: 11534 >> > Did many of those closures use "pass by reference" in the use clause, > because that's one real differentiator between traditional closures and > short lambdas. There's also the fact that use values are bound at the > point where the closure is defined, not where it's called (if they even > exist at all at that point), although that's probably more difficult to > determine. New run to check for that: Total used variables: 11534 ByRef used variables: 1833 So around 13% of used variables are by-ref, and thus would need to be explicitly used even with the new syntax. > There's also the fact that use values are bound at the > point where the closure is defined, not where it's called (if they even > exist at all at that point), although that's probably more difficult to > determine. I... don't see what relevance that has? The potential for confusion is at the definition point, not call point. If a closure is used inline then those are the same place, but if they're not, it's only the definition point that is relevant at the moment. --Larry Garfield