Isaac Clayton

Thanks for the invite, I appreciate it! I'll be sure to play nice :P On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 10:28 AM Keith Simmons ***@***.***> wrote: > I sent you...

Thanks for that great idea! Here are my thoughts on it: In Passerine, we use the `::` as the indexing operator. Thus: ``` record_name::field_name = new_value ``` As tuples are...

> Note: I originally wrote a quick response but upon deliberating over it some more I think I've reached a better conclusion. Before I move on to the meat of...

> The only uncertainty I have is the idiom for combining two records together. 'Construction Patterns' seem perfect for changing one or two values at a time, and maybe they'd...

> One could argue there should be a separate syntax for pointfree updating with a function, to simplify the field_name: field-name . operation, unless you place a lot of trust...

@IFcoltransG: Oh gosh, I thought I had written a response, but I guess I didn't send it. I forgot what I wrote specifically, but here's a loose summary: > For...

> I just want to say thankyou @slightknack for making this such a joy to read! I adore your prose 😍 ever thought of putting together a blog? I'm glad...

This is not ambiguous, and can be resolved using standard judgement rules: If we know the type of `age` is `A`, we know that the function must be an `A...

Thanks for your detailed response! > If `A` is **Natural**, then this is easy: `update { foo: 1 }` is the former syntax, and `update { foo: Natural::increment }` means...

> I think I understand: you've removed the `update { foo: foo + 1 }` syntax for non-pointfree updates. That code would now have to look something like `update {...