Re: [RFC] Pipe Operator

This feature has nothing to do with fluent interfaces, nor has their flaws. The readability of piped processing for functional code is simply a no-brainer here, and doesn't require any API changes in function signatures either: it is not "a different way of doing the same thing". On Apr 30, 2016 17:05, "Fleshgrinder" <php@fleshgrinder.com> wrote: > On 4/30/2016 8:49 AM, Marco Pivetta wrote: > > I think this is much more readable/clear than any event-driven or > > procedural approach. > > We know exactly what is going on, we will get clear stack traces (this > > could need some fine-tuning of the current PR - I didn't try it out yet) > > and we will be able to introduce intermediate steps with ease. In > addition > > to all that, this will ease reactive programming by a lot, as piping is a > > natural fit for streams and all abstractions around streams. > > > > The syntax is also already effective in F# (you can write very expressive > > and easy to understand code with it) and now also landed in Hack. > > > > I'd say +10 to this proposal :D > > > > I am with Stanislav on this one or rather meh. It also goes against what > you usually advocate: there should be only one way to achieve things (I > remember your /fluent interface/ example very well). Unless you changed > your mind regarding that. Hence, it is nice syntactic sugar but it does > not allow us to solve problems that we cannot solve already. > > -- > Richard "Fleshgrinder" Fussenegger > >