Lasse R.H. Nielsen
Lasse R.H. Nielsen
Assuming *some* syntax for not having to write the matched value type in an object pattern: > Would you recommend using such a feature liberally, all over the place? I...
Would that mean that every write to a shared variable would have to check the value? Not sure the type of the closures matters.
There are multiple possible levels here. * `.id` is the simplest. * plus `.id(args)` that also supports constructors/static functions, but stops there. (Issue: Has to reject if `id` is a...
One underlying issue with the second option above (getters, function and visitor invocations only) is that the semantics, static and dynamic, for `C.foo()` with context type _S_ is defined by...
@leafpetersen I'm not sure the complexity is as high as you're suggesting here. If we go with just selector chains, the specification will basically be: ### Grammar ```ebnf ::= ......
We should maybe consider it a kind of tech-debt that our specification and implementation do not agree. That makes it hard to reason about the actual complexity of a specification....
If you think the feature will be useful as written, then I have no problem with trying try to implement it. It might be the only way to see if...
If you are willing to do a little more work, it's fairly easy to have resources allocated in an allocation zone, and have them disposed when leaving that zone. Not...
If I understand the logic, the formatting without a trailing comma would be: ```dart void main() { complex.components.any((component) => component.combinators.length > 1 || component.selector.accept(this)); } ``` if that is at...
Related to #4195, probably others. Quick and dirty implementation: ```dart class Date { static const int _j1970jan1 = 2440588; final DateTime _date; Date(int year, int month, int day) : _date...