Re: [RFC] Default expression

On Aug 25 2024, at 11:11 am, Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes> wrote: > > Which operants don’t make sense? Well certainly all of the ones toward the end of the appendix in the RFC the RFC itself notes are non-sensical. Personally, I'm not sold on the idea default should be an operand in an expression at all though. I do see the value of bitwise operators / expressions as highlighted in the RFC. There might be other cases, but I'm wary of them -- I don't think giving developers the ability to write logic and expressions against hard-coded default values in upstream APIs has a lot of merit in most cases. I can tell you I doubt I would ever support the idea of calling methods of default , which I'm still unclear if this RFC is proposing. I would suggest a compromise where the RFC be refocused to those expressions and operators that explicitly make sense, and leave the rest of them out for now. To me, that basically means "default with bitwise expression support" based on what I've seen so far. John