Oscar Campbell
Oscar Campbell
> Technically you're talking about a HashSet... No syntax decisions should be derived from the implementation detail in this case. Map is used for most Sets to store inclusion, a...
My bad - totally missed that. I'll re-read and re-consider for further discussion before nailing and implementing.
Yes, `impl?` is simple, and reasonable, given the mindshare such re-occuring language constructs gets.
Furthermore: `of?` operator should just be `of`. The literals syntax type declaration style `[] of SomeType` should likely be changed.
Yes, the `in` is what got me thinking the opposite ;-) ``` onyx -- reads well if some-thing in other-thing then do-stuff -- reads awkwardly if some-thing in? other-thing then...
I want to expand on the argument for _"hard" language operator keywords_ rather than methods. Which means allowing method-call style as alternative might not be in. Since they are recognized...
PR! ;-)
Regarding the issue at hand, I had an idea during the day while chasing the bulls - (_Yes! Three bulls ran away from the field this afternoon under my watch...
I think I was too exhausted still when I came in and wrote that, I'll clarify: ``` onyx is_subclass_of_T = it of? T -- "is_a?" - it's a derivation _of_...
Links the issue, while I'm at it: #72