Jordan Rome

> It doesn't have to be let, var or other options are ok too. My point was more that the let allows you to differentiate between an assignment (which might...

> Although we can probably also get away without shadowing? I find variable shadowing confusing and don't think we need it or should allow it.

I agree with @viktormalik here. I think if we add `let` it needs to have a purpose/function. In all the examples above it doesn't seem to, which not only makes...

> This suggests that it's far more common for languages to use some sort of keyword for variable declarations, for what it's worth. You mean except for C, C++, Java...

> I'm in favour of including a keyword because of the extensibility / future-proofing it provides. It'd allow for future extensions like these, those @JakeHillion described, or others we haven't...

Coming back to this conversation as I want to unblock lexical scoping, which is semi-blocked on variable declarations (cc @fbs @viktormalik). How do folks feel about moving forward with basic...

> So we'd probably need to include some form of type deduction for explicitly declared variables to make them usable with builtin types. i.e.: Ok, this is a good reason...

@JakeHillion Thanks for the write up! Adding one more note from the discussion (which may be in some of the other comments on this thread): - let will be the...

Just so it's codified in github comments, I'm good with adding `let` as described in @JakeHillion's comment above. As per our new language decision guidelines, can we get an approve/reject/abstain...

https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/pull/3461