Aaron Matthis

just include a lot of code samples which use reduce and similar functions. If you only include code that maps data it would be an unfair comparison. But this already...

> there is only one field in the struct, which is perfect for "wrapper" types @goretkin that case is perfectly handled by interpreting it as 0-d and using `x[]` (as...

tbh I just find some of the spacings hard to read like here: `-> ~_ | _ ` but I guess that has to do with not being used to...

> I think the `:a` syntax for getting a field from row is confusing because it is the same syntax for `Symbol("a")`. I think `_.a + _.b` is clearer and...

> making code less readable (and maintainable) In my opinion neither of that is true since the use case for that new syntax is mostly compact multiple argument anonymous functions...

@bramtayl they do error: ```julia julia> ₂=2 ERROR: syntax: invalid character "₂" near column 1 Stacktrace: [1] top-level scope at none:1 ``` I had to check that myself though, since...

@xitology a) still, we don't want to lose the broadcasting ability to allow for a new syntax b) in your example you didn't have the same scoping mechanics as we...

@mcabbott oh thanks, now I understand the proposal. The idea is to use the broadcasting dot as the barrier instead of `->`. Well then, only my first point still holds....

@xitology it wouldn't be compatible with #24990 `_.+5 ` is where both proposals collide. Also, I don't like that the meaning of the dot depends on subsequent code. The whole...

@clarkevans > You've chosen to bind _ to different inputs over scope of the expression yes, that was the exact purpose. Don't think of _ as a variable (since you...